Shasta River Juvenile Coho Habitat & Migration Study
Report prepared by:
William R. Chesney, Christopher C. Adams, Whitney B. Crombie, Heather D. Langendorf, Steven A. Stenhouse and Kristen M. Kirkby California Department of Fish and Game
Report prepared for:
U. S. Bureau of Reclamation, Klamath Area Office
Funded by:
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and California Department of Fish and Game
Administrative Assistance provided by:
Shasta Valley Resource Conservation District Table of Contents
List of Tables……………………………………………………………..………. 2 List of Figures…………………………………………………………………….. 3 List of Photos……………………………………………………………………... 5 List of Appendices……………………………………………………………….. 6
1.0 Abstract ……………………………………………………………………………7
2.0 Background ………………………………………………………………………..7 2.1 Study Objectives………………………………………………………………….12
3.0 Methods .…………………………………………………………………………13 3.1 Water Temperature……………………………………………………………….16 3.2 Flow Monitoring …………………………………………………………………17 3.3 Direct Observation ……………………………………………………………….17 3.4 Pit Tagging .………………………………………………………………………25
4.0 Results ……………………………………………………………………………34 4.1 Water Temperature ………………………………………………………………34 4.2 Flow Monitoring ...……………………………………………………………….41 4.3 Direct Observation ……………………………………………………………….44 4.4 Pit Tagging ……………………………………………………………………….49
5.0 Discussion .……………………………………………………………………….59 5.1 Water Temperature ………………………………………………………………59 5.2 Flow Monitoring ...……………………………………………………………….63 5.3 Direct Observation ……………………………………………………………….64 5.4 Pit Tagging ……………………………………………………………………….67
6.0 Summary …………………………………………………………………………71
7.0 Recommendations ..………………………………………………………………72
8.0 Acknowledgments..………………………………………………………………75
9.0 Literature Cited …………………………………………………………………..76
10.0 Appendices .………………………………………………………………………78
1 List of Tables
Table 1. Coho 1+ produced per returning adult………………………………………… ..8 Table 2. Coho 1+ to adult survival………………………………………………………..8 Table 3. Monitoring site names on the Shasta River, Parks Creek and their tributaries.. 16 Table 4. Target survival and recapture probability estimates…………………………... 33 Table 5. MWMTs and MWATs for all sites in 2008…………………………………… 35 Table 6. Maximum Diurnal Water Temperature Change by Site………………………. 36 Table 7. Average Maximum Temperature Difference (°C) between Loggers per Week……………………………………………………… 41 Table 8. Results of tagging in rearing locations…………………………………………51 Table 9. Date of BY 2007 coho tagging at Nelson Ranch (SRM 32) and encounter at SRM 0 in the spring and early summer of 2008………………………………… 54 Table 10. Numbers of Nelson Ranch (SRM 32) spring/summer 2008 tagged coho first detected at upstream antenna systems by season. Some individuals are represented more than once………………………………………………………54 Table 11. Numbers of Big Springs outfall tagged coho detected at other locations, excluding those in spring 2009 at SRM 15 (smolts)…………………………….. 56 Table 12. Total number of fish tagged by location with number and percentage encountered as they left the Shasta as smolts in the spring of 2009, including expansions based on detection probability estimation of 90.3% at SRM 0 during the spring of 2009……………………………………………………….. 57 Table 13. Akaike’s information criterion corrected for small sample size (AICc) and overdispersion (quasilikelihood AICc [QAICc]; overdispersion parameter estimate= 1.54); values were used to select the best model from among five candidate models of survival (Φ) and recapture probability (p) for coho smolts emigrating from rearing habitats on HIG, Shasta River from 3/15/09 to 5/30/09 (period symbol = parameter is constant over the given attribute). ………………58 Table 14. Estimated apparent survival of coho in three Shasta River reaches from 3/15/09 to 5/30/09, including standard error and confidence intervals…………. 58 Table 15. Estimated detection probability of PIT tag antenna systems and RST from 3/15/09 to 5/30/09……………………………………………………………….. 59 Table 16. Number of fish released by location, and point estimates of apparent survival (Φ) and detection probability (p)……………………………………..... 59 Table 17. Status of Shasta River coho cohorts…………………………………………..71 Table 18. Observed concerns, life stage affected, location and example solutions for maximizing salmon production and survival in the upper Shasta Watershed on the Hole in the Ground and Shasta Springs Ranches………………………………...73
2 List of Figures
Figure 1. Estimated and projected number of returning Shasta River coho cohort A 2003 – 2009………………………………………………………………………. 9 Figure 2. Estimated and projected number of returning Shasta River coho cohort B 2001 – 2010………………………………………………………………………. 9 Figure 3. Estimated and projected number of returning Shasta River coho cohort C 2002 – 2011………………………………………………………………………. 9 Figure 4. SHASTA RIVER MAP………………………………………………………..11 Figure 5. Private ranch ownership within the Big Springs Complex……………………13 Figure 6. Locations of monitoring sites in the upper Shasta River basin at Shasta Big Springs Ranch in the summer of 2008…………………………………………... 14 Figure 7. Locations of monitoring sites in the upper Shasta River basin at Hole in the Ground Ranch in the summer of 2008…………………………………………... 15 Figure 8. Nelson Ranch trap placement………………………………………………… 27 Figure 9. Tagging locations…………………………………………………………….. 29 Figure 10. MWMTs for summer 2008 Shasta River from RM 32.9 to RM 37.4………. 35 Figure 11. Number of days by site in 2008 that maximum daily water temperatures were greater than or equal to 23 degrees………………………………………... 36 Figure 12a. Maximum weekly water temperatures at HIG sites during Julian week 28.. 37 Figure 12b. Maximum weekly water temperatures at HIG sites during Julian week 29.. 37 Figure 12c. Maximum weekly water temperatures at HIG sites during Julian week 30.. 38 Figure 13a. Maximum daily water temperatures at HIG sites on 7/13/08 at 15:00…….. 38 Figure 13b. Maximum daily water temperatures at HIG sites on 7/16/08 at 16:00…….. 39 Figure 13c. Maximum daily water temperatures at HIG sites on 07/23/08 at 17:00…… 39 Figure 14. Sequence of water temperatures at four hour intervals at Hole in the Ground Ranch sites from 06:00 on 07/16/08 through 02:00 on 07/17/08...... 40 Figure 15. Shasta River flow downstream of Big Springs Creek, 03/26/08 through 10/31/08………………………………………………………………… 42 Figure 16a. Discharge (cfs) measured in the Shasta River at five sites at the Hole in the Ground Ranch on June 11, 2008………………….………………… 42 Figure 16b. Discharge (cfs) measured in the Shasta River at five sites at the Hole in the Ground Ranch on July 8, 2008………………………………..…….. 43 Figure 16c. Discharge (cfs) measured in the Shasta River at five sites at the Hole in the Ground Ranch on July 21, 2008………………….…………………. 43 Figure 17. Partial diagram of some diversions, irrigation ditches and tailwater return sites observed along the Shasta River at Hole in the Ground Ranch in 2008…… 44 Figure 18. SBS 4: mean number of 0+ salmonids observed per dive count in the Shasta River on Big Springs Ranch in 2008………….………………………….45 Figure 19. SBS 3: mean number of 0+ salmonids observed per dive count in the Shasta River on Shasta Big Springs Ranch in 2008….…………………………..45 Figure 20. SBS 2: mean number of 0+ salmonids observed per dive count in the Shasta River on Shasta Big Springs Ranch in 2008………………….…………. 46 Figure 21. SBS 1: mean number of 0+ salmonids observed per dive count in the Shasta River on Shasta Big Springs Ranch in 2008….…………………………..46
3 Figure 22. HIG 5: mean number of 0+ salmonids observed per dive count in the Shasta River on Hole in the Ground Ranch in 2008….…………………………. 47 Figure 23. HIG 4: mean number of 0+ salmonids observed per dive count in the Shasta River on Hole in the Ground Ranch in 2008……………………………..47 Figure 24. HIG 3: mean number of 0+ salmonids observed per dive count in the Shasta River on Hole in the Ground Ranch in 2008……………………………..48 Figure 25. HIG 2: mean number of 0+ salmonids observed per dive count in the Shasta River on Hole in the Ground Ranch in 2008……………………………..48 Figure 26. HIG 1: mean number of 0+ salmonids observed per dive count in the Shasta River on Hole in the Ground Ranch in 2008……………………………..49 Figure 27. Total BY2007 coho catch at Nelson Ranch (SRM 32) with the RST and fyke nets in the spring and early summer of 2008 by julian week.…………. 50 Figure 28. Upper Shasta antenna system locations……………………………………... 52 Figure 29. Numbers of individual coho detected at the HIG 5 antenna system by julian week………………………………………………………………………. 55 Figure 30. Numbers of individual coho detected at the HIG 3 antenna system by julian week………………………………………………………………………. 55 Figure 31. Numbers of individual coho detected at the Big Springs Creek outfall antenna system by julian week in 2008 and 2009………………………………..56 Figure 32. Plot of number of coho detected at SRM 0 in spring 2009 by day…………...57 Figure 33. Diagram (not to scale) of encounter locations, reach lengths, and apparent survival estimates, including 95% confidence intervals..………………59 Figure 34. Diurnal temperature change that occurred on 5/16/08 Shasta River between HIG 2 and SBS1..………...……………………………………………. 60 Figure 35. LIDAR generated tailwater neighborhoods and pour points for HIG sites 3, 4, and 5…………………………………………………………………... 62 Figure 36. LIDAR generated tailwater neighborhoods and pour points for HIG sites 1 and 2……………………………………………………………………… 63 Figure 37. SBS 1 Hourly Water Temperature Variability for April……………………. 64 Figure 38. SBS 1 Hourly Water Temperature Variability for May…………………….. 64 Figure 39. HIG 2 Hourly Water Temperature Variability for May…………………….. 65 Figure 40. HIG 3 Hourly Water Temperature Variability for May…………………….. 65 Figure 41. SBS 1 Hourly Water Temperature Variability for July……………………... 66 Figure 42. SBS 1 Hourly Water Temperature Variability for August………………….. 66 Figure 43. Cumulative numbers of coho from the first and second releases that were detected at HIG 1 (successful HIG emigrants, solid line) and last detected at HIG 1 (suspected HIG mortalities, broken line)………………………………… 68 Figure 44. Hourly water temperatures at HIG 4, 3/15/09 through 5/31/09…………….. 69 Figure 45. Hourly water temperatures at HIG 3, 3/15/09 through 5/31/09…………….. 69 Figure 46. Hourly water temperatures at HIG 2, 3/15/09 through 5/31/09…………….. 69
4 List of Photos
Cover photo: Juvenile coho rearing at Hole in the Ground Site 5 on 03/25/09 Photo 1. Site SBS 1……………………………………………………………………... 18 Photo 2. Site SBS 2……………………………………………………………………... 19 Photo 3. Site SBS 3……………………………………………………………………... 19 Photo 4. Site SBS 4……………………………………………………………………... 20 Photo 5. HIG 1………………………………………………………………………….. 20 Photo 6. HIG 2………………………………………………………………………….. 21 Photo 7. HIG 3………………………………………………………………………….. 21 Photo 8. HIG 4………………………………………………………………………….. 22 Photo 9. HIG 5………………………………………………………………………….. 22 Photo 10. Clear Springs………………………………………………………………… 23 Photo 11. Kettle Springs impoundment………………………………………………… 23 Photo 12. Kettle Springs Creek………………………………………………………… 24 Photo 13. Big Springs Lake Outfall…………………………………………………….. 24 Photo 14. Nelson Ranch Rotary Screw Trap…………………………………………….26 Photo 15. Nelson ranch Fyke Nets ………………………………………………………27 Photo 16. Antenna System at HIG 5, Winter 2009……………………………………... 30 Photo 17. Antenna system at SRM 0, Spring 2009……………………………………... 30 Photo 18. Directional Antenna System at HIG 1……………………………………….. 31 Photo 19. SRM 0 Detection Effort, Spring 2009……………………………………….. 32 Photo 20. HIG 5 Impoundment, 4/21/09……………………………………………….. 70 Photo 21. HIG 3 Impoundment, 4/21/09……………………………………………….. 70
5 List of Appendices
Appendix 1. Monitoring sites on the Shasta River in Siskiyou County, California during the summer of 2008……………………………………………………… 78 Appendix 2. Fyke Net Specifications……………………………………………………79 Appendix 3. Rearing capture methods………………………………………………….. 79 Appendix 4. Table of Summer 2008 maximum temperatures per week per site……….. 81 Appendix 5. Summer 2008 maximum weekly temperatures per week…………… …... 82 Appendix 6. Hourly temperature variability per month at temperature monitoring sites 2008…………………………………………………………… 84 Appendix 7. Discharge (cfs) measured at five monitoring sites on the Shasta River at Hole in the Ground Ranch in 2008……………………………………...93 Appendix 8. Number of salmonids observed per visit from dive counts in the Shasta River at sites on Shasta Big Springs Ranch in 2008……………………...94 Appendix 9. Number of salmonids observed per visit from dive counts in the Shasta River at sites on the Hole in the Ground Ranch in 2008………………… 95 Appendix 10. Nelson Ranch Salmonid Catches……………………………………….. 96 Appendix 11. Quality Control……………………………………………………...... 100 Appendix 12. Antenna system locations and dates of operation……………………… 101 Appendix 13. Nelson Ranch tagged coho upstream detections……………………….. 102 Appendix 14. Fall Nelson Upstream Hits…………………………………………… ...108 Appendix 15. HIG 3, HIG 5 Detection Histories……………………………………… 109 Appendix 16. Detection histories of BY2007 coho tagged in the HIG 2 vicinity (SRM 35.2) site.……………………………………………………………… ...128 Appendix 17. BSOF detection histories………………………………………………..130 Appendix 18. Big Springs RM 1.5 tagged coho detection histories………………… ...136 Appendix 19. Kettle Springs tagged coho detection histories………………………… 137 Appendix 20. Fork length, location, and date of tagging and recapture at SRM 0….... .138 Appendix 21. List of Julian weeks and calendar equivalents………………………… ..140
6 1.0 Abstract
Initial surveys of the upper Shasta River between river miles (RMs) 33.72 and 31.98 in April of 2008 determined that 0+ juvenile coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) were rearing throughout the area surveyed. Age 0+ coho salmon were captured at RM 32 and tagged with passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags in order to study migration behavior and estimate the probability of survival.
A rapid increase in the maximum daily water temperatures from 21.4 degrees C in late April to over 24.2 degrees C during four consecutive days in May displaced juvenile coho from three of the four study sites between RMs 32.9 and 33.6. Some of the PIT tagged juvenile coho responded to the increase in water temperature by migrating over 4 miles upstream to areas of cold spring inflow. All observed over-summer rearing habitat utilized by coho was associated with cold springs.
Throughout the summer of 2008, coho reared successfully at three study sites on the Shasta River mainstem between RMs 36 and 36.8, where the weekly maximum temperatures ranged from 20.57 to 22.47° C. Juvenile coho were also observed rearing during the summer in Kettle Springs Creek at the outfall of Kettle Springs, in Big Springs Creek at the outfall of Big Springs Lake and at a small coldwater seep on the mainstem Shasta River at RM 33.3. Summer rearing habitat downstream of the cold spring at RM 37 on the Shasta River was impacted by water use practices including the release of warm stored water from an upstream reservoir, diversion of spring water, and warm tailwater returning to the stream.
We used a Cormack-Jolly-Seber live-recapture model (Schwarz and Seber 1999) in program MARK (White and Burnham 1999) to obtain maximum likelihood estimates of apparent survival (Φi) and recapture probability (pi) over three river segments for coho smolts emigrating from rearing habitats on the Hole in the Ground (HIG) Ranch in the spring of 2009 (3/15/09 to 5/30/09). Estimates of apparent survival for coho smolts emigrating from the principal rearing habitat on the Shasta River (RM 36.0 to 36.8) were made using PIT tagged coho and remote detection systems located at key points through out the watershed. These estimates of survival identified specific stream reaches in the Shasta River where survival was reduced.
Recommended changes to management practices include conservation of spring water and the elimination of tailwater return to cold water refugial areas
2.0 Background
Declining numbers of coho salmon in the Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast Evolutionary Significant Unit (SONCC ESU) have led to the listing of coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the California Endangered Species Act (CESA). These listings have resulted in increased monitoring of coho populations in key watersheds including the Shasta River.
Since 2001, the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) has counted the number of coho returning to spawn in the Shasta River and estimated the number of smolts produced by
7 these fish (Chesney D. 2008; Chesney W. et al. 2009). Table 1 shows the number of smolts produced per returning adult from Brood Years 2001 – 2006. Table 2 shows the number of adults returning per smolts produced and the smolt-to-adult survival for Brood Years 2004 through 2008. Using the average number of smolts produced per adult; we have projected the number of smolts we expect to be produced in 2009 and 2010. Table 2 shows the projected adult returns for 2009 – 2011 using the average smolt to adult survival rate of 2.9%. The number of smolts produced per adult has ranged from 38 smolts per adult in 2003 to 4.4 in 2008. A downward trend is shown for all three cohorts (Figures 1-3).
Table 1. Coho 1+ produced per returning adult Brood Year Adults 1+ produced in Year smolts per adult 2001 291 11,052 2003 38.0 2002 86 1,799 2004 20.9 2003 187 2,054 2005 11.0 2004 373 10,833 2006 29.0 2005 69 1,178 2007 17.1 2006 47 208 2008 4.4 2007 255 5118 2009 20.1 2008 31 622 2010 20.1 Projected production in 2009 and 2010 based on average production of 20.1 1+ per adult observed for brood years 2001 - 2006
Table 2. Coho 1+ to adult survival Brood Year Adults Emigration year 1+ produced % return Adults returning in Brood Year 2001 291 2003 11,052 3.37% 373 2004 2002 86 2004 1,799 3.84% 69 2005 2003 187 2005 2,054 2.29% 47 2006 2004 373 2006 10,833 2.35% 255 2007 2005 69 2007 1,178 2.63% 31 2008 2006 47 2008 208 2.90% 6 2009 2007 255 2009 5,118 2.90% 148 2010 2008 31 2010 622 2.90% 18 2011 Projected 1+ estimates for 2009 and 2010 were made using the mean smolt per adult value (23.2) from 2001 through 2008. Projected adult returns in 2009 - 2011 are based on the average1+ smolt to adult survival rate for 2004 - 2008 (2.90%).
Need for Upper Basin Studies Estimates of the number of smolts produced per adult have allowed us to identify a variable survival rate for juvenile coho and a projected downward trend in the population. To identify the responsible factors, we needed an understanding of the early life history of coho in the Shasta River and information regarding the location and condition of preferred spawning and rearing habitat. Until recently, restricted access to private land in the Shasta Valley has limited our ability to conduct this initial assessment.
8 400
350
300
Num be r and 250 projected 200 number of returning adults 150
100
50
0 2003 2006 2009 Brood year
Figure 1. Estimated and projected number of returning Shasta River Coho Cohort A 2003-2009
400
350
300
Num be r and 250 projected 200 number of returning adults 150
100
50
0 2001 2004 2007 2010 Brood year
Figure 2. Estimated and projected number of returning Shasta River Coho Cohort B 2001-2010
400
350
300
Num be r and 250 projected 200 number of returning adults 150
100
50
0 2002 2005 2008 2011 Brood year
Figure 3. Estimated and projected number of returning Shasta River Coho Cohort C 2002-2011
9 Location of Spawning Habitat Radio tagging studies in 2004 through 2009 have determined that the lower six miles of the Shasta River canyon and the upstream area known as the Big Springs Complex shown in Figure 4 are the primary spawning areas for coho in the Shasta River (Littleton and Pisano, 2006; Olswang, 2007, and 2008).
Juvenile Rearing Habitat in the lower Shasta River Rotary trapping at the mouth of the Shasta River has documented the emigration of coho fry or parr in response to low flows and high water temperatures which occur after the start of the irrigation season (Chesney et al. 2003). Irrigation is allowed from April 1st through October 1st each year. Maximum daily water temperatures in the canyon during the summer can exceed 30° C. The maximum weekly maximum temperature (MWMT) at the rotary trap site (RM 0.3) during the summer of 2009 was 29.14° C. Due to high water temperatures, low flows and suspected barriers to juvenile migration out of the canyon, we believe the progeny of coho spawning in the Shasta River canyon are unable to find over-summer rearing habitat in the Shasta River.
Juvenile Rearing Habitat in the Big Springs Complex Historic accounts of 125 cubic feet per second (cfs) of 52° F water from Big Springs (Wales 1952) led us to believe that considerable over-summer rearing habitat should exist in the Big Springs Complex. Based on these accounts, we suspected that progeny of the coho spawning in the Big Springs Complex were finding over-summer rearing habitat in the upper watershed.
In 2006, the Nature Conservancy purchased the Nelson Ranch and allowed CDFG access to the upper Shasta River (RM 27.21 to 32.06). During the spring of 2006 we observed changes in water and diurnal temperatures uncharacteristic of a spring-fed river. No juvenile coho were observed rearing on the Nelson Ranch after May 2006 when water temperatures reached over 24° C (Jeffres 2008). Results of the Thermal Infrared (TIR) surveys conducted for the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (NCRWQCB) in 2003 confirmed that, due in part to tailwater returns, Big Springs Creek was contributing warm water to the Shasta River and that the Shasta River and Parks Creek upstream of Big Springs Creek were also sources of warm water. The TIR data also indicated the existence of cold water springs upstream of Big Springs Creek at RM 37.9, 38.87 and at 39.36. While installing a diversion screen in October 2007, at RM 36.52, CDFG staff observed coho parr and confirmed that over-summer rearing was occurring in the upper Shasta River (Olswang, 2007 field note).
10
Figure 4. Principal spawning areas for Shasta River coho based on 2004 - 2008 radio telemetry studies
11 2.1 Study Objectives
The objectives of the study initiated in 2007 were: 1) To determine the location and thermal characteristics of over-summer rearing habitat utilized by juvenile coho within the Big Springs complex. 2) To estimate the probability of survival of juvenile coho salmon rearing and emigrating from the Shasta River. This study was proposed to work with Cohort B from Brood Year 2007, when the greatest numbers of juvenile coho were likely to be rearing in the Shasta River.
Access to the Big Springs Complex In February 2008, the study site for this project was limited to the portion of the river passing through the Nelson Ranch. On 3/1/08, the Nature Conservancy purchased an option to buy the Busk Ranch; this option included a one year access to the 4000+ acre ranch including Big Springs Creek and 2.9 miles of the mainstem Shasta River (RM 31.98 to 34.88). The Nature Conservancy granted us permission to include this property in our study. In May 2008, Emmerson Investments Inc (EII) allowed us limited access to the Hole in the Ground (HIG), Shasta Springs and Seldom Seen Ranches. With the addition of these properties; we had access to most of the Big Springs Complex (Figure 5).
12
Figure 5. Private ranch ownerships within the Big Springs Complex.
Initial Surveys Initial reconnaissance level surveys began on 3/20/08 at the Shasta Big Springs Ranch. Our immediate goals were to identify where coho were rearing and establish study sites, capture and implant PIT tags into coho with a fork length over 55 mm and construct tag detection stations. On 5/6/08 we began similar surveys on EII property. 3.0 Methods To get an understanding of where coho reared during the spring and summer months in the Shasta River and to describe the temperature characteristics of the habitat during this period, we monitored stream temperatures, measured stream flow, conducted snorkel surveys and monitored the location, movement and survival of PIT tagged coho. We monitored juvenile coho rearing habitat on the mainstem Shasta River between RM 32.9 and RM 37.4 (Table 3) at the locations shown in Figures 6 and 7.
13
Figure 6. Location of monitoring sites in the upper Shasta River basin at Shasta Big Springs Ranch in the summer of 2008
14
Figure 7. Location of monitoring sites in the upper Shasta River basin at Hole in the Ground and Shasta Springs Ranch in the summer of 2008.
15 Table 3. Monitoring site names on the Shasta River, Parks Creek and their tributaries. Site Name Site Name Abbreviated River Mile Shasta Big Springs 1 SBS 1 32.9 Shasta Big Springs 2 SBS 2 33.3 Shasta Big Springs 3 SBS 3 33.4 Shasta Big Springs 4 SBS 4 33.6 Big Springs Creek BSC ----- Shasta Big Springs 5 SBS 5 33.7 Shasta Big Springs 6 SBS 6 34.9 Parks Creek PC ----- Hole in the Ground 1 HIG 1 35.0 Hole in the Ground 2 HIG 2 35.2 Hole in the Ground 3 HIG 3 36.0 Hole in the Ground 4 HIG 4 36.3 Hole in the Ground 5 HIG 5 36.8 Clear Springs CS 37.0 Fence Line Fence 37.4 Kettle Springs KS ----- River Mile determined from 2003 TIR survey data (Watershed Sciences, 2004)
3.1 Water Temperature Monitoring Methods
Site Selection of Water Temperature Monitoring Sites Water temperature loggers were placed at seven sites on the Busk Ranch and eight locations at Hole in the Ground Ranch. Of the total 15 locations, 8 of these logger deployments corresponded to dive site locations where juvenile coho had been found rearing in the summer of 2008. Additional loggers were placed at two spring sources, Kettle and Clear Springs, and also at the mouths of Parks Creek and Big Springs Creek. For added resolution, additional loggers were placed to bracket the river and give a better idea of thermal changes occurring throughout time and location. The river mile and GPS coordinates of the locations where loggers were deployed are shown in Appendix 1. At the request of the EII management, two loggers were placed at each HIG site, with the exception of Clear Springs for the period of record. A second logger was eventually placed at the Clear Springs site.
A total of 23 HOBO U22 Water temp pro v2 loggers (Onset Corp. Part # U22-001) were fielded at several sites in the study area. The loggers are factory calibrated and are accurate within 0.2° C over a 0° to 50° C range. All loggers were set to record temperatures at hourly intervals. For field deployments, individual loggers are placed in an open-ended steel can attached to an anchor point on the bank via stainless steel cable. These assemblies are placed on the bottom, typically near the center of the river in flowing water.
Once in place, logger assemblies were regularly cleaned of debris. Loggers were offloaded in the field through the use of an optical interface communications waterproof shuttle (Onset Corp. Part # U-DTW-1). The shuttle has nonvolatile storage for the preservation of up to 63 logger readouts. The raw data points are offloaded into HOBOware Pro software and then further processed in Microsoft Excel.
Daily and weekly minima, maxima and averages were generated for each location for the period of 4/1/08 to 8/19/08. Additionally, maximum weekly maximum temperatures (MWMT) and
16 maximum weekly average temperatures (MWAT) were established for each river location (Table 5). Box and whisker plots were created for each site per month (Appendix 6). These plots organize data points by hour and allow diurnal changes and variability to be visualized. If a monitoring site contained two loggers, as is the case for HIG locations, box plots were created using the combined data from both loggers. These are standard box plots, with whiskers representing maxima and minima of all data for a particular hour. The boxes bracket the 25th and 75th percentiles.
3.2 Flow measurements Methods
Hole in the Ground Ranch Streamflow was measured throughout the monitoring period at the five locations on the Hole in the Ground Ranch shown in Figure 2 and in Appendix 1. Water velocities were measured with a Marsh-McBirney Model 2000 flow meter and a top setting wading rod. Velocities were measured and discharge calculated using the methods described by Bovee and Milhous (1978). Suitable transects were located at or as close as possible to the study sites.
Shasta Big Springs Ranch Streamflow for the Shasta River on the Shasta Big Springs Ranch was measured by the Center for Watershed Sciences (Mount et al. 2009). Stream gauges were installed and rated in the Shasta River, Parks Creek, Hole in the Ground Creek and Big Springs Creek. Total flow downstream of Big Springs Creek was determined by adding the flow from the individual streamflow gauging stations.
3.3 Direct Observation Methods
We used direct observation techniques to monitor salmonids rearing in selected study sites. The purpose of these dives was to determine the presence/absence of juvenile salmonids rearing at study sites under different stream conditions and seasons. Sites were selected based on the presence of juvenile salmonids during our initial surveys. Sites ranged in size from 25 to70 feet in length and included a variety of habitats. Study sites began and ended at natural breaks in the habitat such as the beginning or end of cover or velocity shelters and pools. Typically three divers made separate passes beginning at the downstream end of the site. Divers kept individual counts of the number of each species of salmonids observed. The river mile and GPS coordinates of each dive site are listed in Appendix 1.
Site Selection at the Shasta Big Springs Ranch We selected four sites downstream of Big Springs Creek between RM 32.9 and 33.6 where 0+ coho were rearing in early April 2008. All of the sites included velocity shelters, cover and woody debris. Water birch (Betula occidentalis) was present at all sites. Shasta Big Springs (SBS) sites 1- 4 are shown in Figure 6 and in photos 1-4.
Site Selection at Hole in the Ground Ranch On 5/13/08 and 5/21/08, we selected five sites on the Hole in the Ground Ranch between river mile 35 and 37 on the Shasta River. These sites represented a variety of rearing habitats and conditions, including one site directly downstream of a cold spring inflow. The irrigation season had been under way for six weeks by the time these sites were established. We do not know what
17 effect diversions and tailwater had on the distribution of salmonids in the reach prior to the selection of our sites. Hole in the Ground sites 1-5 are shown in Figure 7 and in Photos 5-9.
On 6/17/08 we were allowed access to a tributary spring to Parks Creek known as Kettle Springs. An earthen berm has been constructed around the spring to store and redirect flow from the natural channel into an irrigation ditch. Flow from the impoundment into Kettle Springs Creek was controlled by a head gate. An aerial photograph of the impoundment is shown in Photo 10. We observed juvenile coho rearing in Kettle Springs Creek in the pool directly below the head gate structure (Photo 11). Due to the presence of a substantial cold water source and rearing coho, we added Kettle Springs to the list of study sites.
Photo 1, Site SBS 1 This photo was taken on 4/3/2008, looking downstream from the top of the reach. The dive transect was 70 feet long on the right bank
18 Photo 2. SBS 2 This photo taken on 4/10/2008, looking downstream from the top of the reach. The dive transect was 36 feet long on the left bank.
Photo 3. SBS 3 This photo was taken on 4/17/2008 looking upstream from the lower end of the reach. The dive transect was 25 feet long on the left bank.
19 Photo 4. SBS 4 This photo was taken on 5/1/2008, looking upstream from the lower end of the reach. The dive transect was 47 feet long on the left bank.
Photo 5. HIG 1 This photo taken on 9/30/2008, looking upstream from the lower end of the reach. The reach was 30 feet long and included the entire channel.
20 Photo 6. HIG 2 This photo was taken on 5/13/2008, looking upstream from the lower end of the reach. The reach was 30 feet long and included the entire channel.
Photo 7. HIG 3 This photo was taken on 5/28/2008, looking downstream from mid reach. The reach was 25 feet long and included the entire channel.
21 Photo 8. HIG 4 This photo was taken on 4/14/2009, looking upstream from mid reach. The reach was 65 feet long and included the entire channel.
Photo 9. HIG 5 This photo was taken on 4/28/2009 looking upstream from the lower end of the reach. The dive transect was 50 feet long on the left bank.
22 Photo 10. Clear Springs This photo was taken on 4/14/2009 from the confluence of Clear Springs and the Shasta River.
Photo 11. Kettle Springs Impoundment This photo was taken on 7/7/2008.
23 Photo 12. Kettle Springs Creek, This photo was taken on 8/6/2008 looking downstream from the berm that impounds Kettle Springs. The dive reach included the entire channel from the diver’s location to the outfall just out of view at the bottom of the photo.
Photo 13. Big Springs Lake Outfall, This photo was taken on 8/7/2008, looking upstream towards the pool at the outfall of Big Springs Lake.
24 3.4 PIT tagging Methods
Overview Passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags were used to individually mark juvenile (BY2007) coho salmon in the upper Shasta River in 2008. The purpose was to obtain information on coho movements, rearing habitats, and survival. To facilitate collection of this data, remote detection systems were deployed at key locations within accessible areas of the watershed based on both known and suspected life history traits. An important assumption for this study is that the behavior, growth, and survival of PIT tagged fish accurately reflect that of untagged fish within the population. This method was chosen for its ability to generate continuous and detailed data on individual fish as well as population segments with a single capture effort, thus reducing handling stress and potential mortality to this federally listed population.
To take advantage of new landownership access opportunities, ever changing environmental conditions and lessons learned through experience as the study progressed, several different techniques were used to capture coho for implantation of PIT tags throughout the study. Reconnaissance dives were often used to guide opportunistic capture efforts in the areas where limited access was acquired. PIT tag detection efforts also had to remain flexible as development of new technology and improved equipment availability provided opportunities to increase effectiveness of the monitoring effort.
PIT Tagging Methods Coho of 55 mm fork length and larger were implanted with 12 mm 134khtz (Biomark #tx1411sst) PIT tags using methodology similar to that described by PIT Tag Steering Committee, 1999. Fish were anaesthetized with two 2.4g Alka-Seltzer tablets dissolved in approximately 1L of river water. All of the coho captured were scanned with a Biomark FS- 2001 or Pocket Reader EX to determine the presence of previously tagged individuals. All PIT tags and 14 gauge syringe needles were disinfected with 90% ethanol prior to use. Each PIT tag was implanted by gently creating a small incision with the needle tip about 10 mm anterior to the base of the left pelvic fin. The PIT tag was then inserted into the body cavity through the incision by hand. The biological data recorded for each fish included collection of a scale sample from under the adipose fin on the fish’s left side, measurement of fork length to the nearest mm, and wet weight to .01g, after the tag was inserted. Most fish were held for about 20 minutes or until normal behavior resumed and were then released back to the river at their original capture location.
Quality Control To assess potential mortality and tag shedding that may be associated with tag insertion techniques used during this study, a sample of 84 tagged coho captured at the Nelson Ranch (RM 32) site were held in a net pen overnight and re-examined prior to release the following morning.
Nelson Ranch (RM 32) Capture Effort CDFG’s Anadromous Fisheries Resource Assessment and Monitoring Program (AFRAMP) has seasonally operated a five foot rotary screw trap (RST) on the Nelson Ranch at RM 32 since 2006. The operation of this trap in 2008 enabled us to capture coho and implant PIT tags for this study (photo 14). In addition to the RST, three fyke nets (Appendix 2) were also deployed to capture coho in a large eddy; about 200 yards upstream of the RST (Figure 8). These traps were
25 fished at the stream margin, with a single lead run from the center of the trap’s throat perpendicular to the river bank. Each fyke net was secured to T-posts driven into the river bottom (Photo 15). Fyke net sampling locations were chosen in areas of the channel with a uniform bottom, low water velocities, and depths which matched the lead height of the fyke net.
Beginning in mid February of 2008, fyke traps were fished two days (24 hour sets) per week until BY2007 coho of minimum tagging size (55mm) were caught, at which point sampling effort was increased to up to seven days per week Regular sampling effort ceased in early July of 2008 when coho were no longer caught on a consistent basis. Intermittent sampling effort continued through the winter of 2008 and regular sampling efforts resumed in April of 2009, when the RST and fyke traps were set at least twice per week. The trapping effort in 2008 at the Nelson ranch is described in detail in Kirkby (2009).
Photo 14. Nelson Ranch Rotary Screw Trap
26 Photo 15. Nelson Ranch Fyke Nets
Figure 8. Nelson Ranch trap placement. (SRM = Shasta River Mile)
27 Tagging at Summer Rearing Locations Capture of coho from rearing locations took place in the summer and fall of 2008 and was guided by opportunistic reconnaissance snorkel surveys in areas of the upper Shasta River and tributaries to which limited access was granted. A variety of capture techniques were used during the study and were selected for each site dependent on the effectiveness of the method for the specific channel characteristics and fish behaviors encountered. The capture methods utilized during the study included fyke nets, minnow traps, seine nets and hand held nets. A more thorough description of these capture techniques can be found in Appendix 3. The locations of these capture sites were at SBS dive site 1 (RM 32.9), the vicinity of HIG dive sites 1-5 (RM 35.0-36.8), Big Springs outfall, Big Springs Creek RM 1.5, and Kettle Springs (Figure 9).
28
Figure 9. Tagging locations (SRM = Shasta River Mile)
Remote Detection Effort Remote PIT tag detection systems were comprised of in-stream antennas operated with Allflex panel readers and data storage unit custom-made by Mauro Engineering. In most locations, power was supplied by solar panels coupled with 12 volt batteries. Most of the antennas measured 10’x 3’ and were constructed with copper tubing housed in PVC pipe. Antennas were set perpendicular to the stream flow and secured to t-posts driven into the river bottom (Photo 16, 17). Detections of individual PIT tags were recorded onto a compact flash card along with the antenna number, date and time stamp. A test tag was also installed on each antenna which was programmed to turn on briefly every ten minutes to provide verification that the equipment was operating correctly. For a detailed description of the antenna systems, see Adams 2009.
29 Photo 16. Antenna System at HIG 5, Winter 2009
Photo 17. Antenna System at RM 0, Spring 2009
Four remote detection systems, consisting of one to three antennas partially covering the river transect, were in place during the spring of 2008. These were located just downstream of the Nelson Ranch RST (RM 32), lower Nelson Ranch (RM 29), Meamber Ranch (RM 15), and just upstream (RM 0) of the confluence of the Shasta River with the Klamath River. After the study began, access to study sites upstream of the Nelson Ranch provided an opportunity to expand the study and install additional remote detection systems in known rearing locations at RM 32.9, 36,
30 and 36.8, Big Springs Creek outfall, and Kettle Springs Creek outfall. In addition to these locations, antenna systems were installed at sites through which coho movements were anticipated. These included RM 32.1, just upstream of Parks Creek at RM 35, Parks Creek RM 0, Parks Creek RM 4, and Big Springs Creek RM 1.6. Remote detection sites at Parks Creek RM 0, 7 and RM 34.5 were characterized by low flow and a confined channel. This allowed for the installation of directional antenna systems, in which three cross-stream antennas were placed in succession (Photo 18) The complete stream coverage by each antenna and time stamp associated with each detection permitted the identification of either upstream or downstream movement of each individually PIT tagged fish.
Photo 18. Directional Antenna System at HIG 1
A five foot RST was operated by AFRAMP during the 2008 and 2009 emigration season approximately 250 yards upstream from the Shasta River’s confluence with the Klamath River (RM 0) and this effort served as a recapture location for PIT tagged fish as they emigrated from the Shasta. All coho captured at this trap were scanned with a Biomark FS-2001 PIT tag reader. Recaptured PIT tagged fish were measured for fork length, wet weighed, and sampled for scales on the right side between the dorsal and adipose fins, above the lateral line. In February of 2009, three independent antenna systems were also installed at the RM 0 sites, approximately 40 yards downstream and 20 and 600 yards upstream of the RST. These systems consisted of three antennas each and covered the majority of the river’s transect. Photo 19 illustrates the configuration of these antennas and RST during the spring of 2009.
31 Photo 19. RM 0 Detection Effort, Spring 2009
Data Analysis Biologists with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in Klamath Falls, Oregon, developed a Microsoft Access database while working with endangered suckers in the upper Klamath Basin to store and analyze PIT tagging and detection data. This database program was provided by the USGS biologists to assist our effort. Quantitative as well as qualitative data were analyzed by running queries relating tagging times and locations to detection times and locations.
Smolt Survival and Detection Probability Estimates We used a Cormack-Jolly-Seber live-recapture model (Schwarz and Seber 1999) in program MARK (White and Burnham 1999) to obtain maximum likelihood estimates of apparent survival (Φi) and recapture probability (pi) over three river segments for coho smolts emigrating from rearing habitats on HIG in the spring of 2009 (3/15/09 to 5/30/09). Tagged coho included in this analysis were detected at least once on the HIG 5, HIG 3, or HIG 1 antenna systems on or after 3/15/09. These initial detections were combined with detections at the RM 0 antenna systems and RST to generate a seven encounter capture history matrix to which this model was applied (Table 4).
32 Table 4. Target survival and recapture probability estimates. Encounter locations used to generate seven encounter capture history matrices, including approximate distances between, points of releases, and target apparent survival (Φ) and recapture (detection) probability (p) estimates.
Encounter HIG 5 Reach HIG 3 Reach HIG 1 Reach WEIR Reach WEIR Reach RST Reach WEIR Locations 1 2 3 C 4 B 5 6 A Approx 0.5 1 35 miles 1800 60 120 Reach miles mile feet feet feet Length Releases R R R Estimates NA Φ p Φ p Φ p Φ set p Φ set p Φ set NA to 1 to 1 to 1
The range of dates chosen as criteria for inclusion in the analysis were selected based upon observed coho emigration during previous RST sampling, direct observation of decreasing numbers and absence of coho in rearing areas, and data from remote detections of tagged fish. All of the remote antenna systems operated consistently throughout this time period. Apparent survival (Φ) is the complement of the sum of mortality and permanent emigration (Pollock et al. 2007). Since Φ’s were estimated over river reaches in our study design, residency was confounded with mortality. Additional sampling efforts in the main stem Shasta River and several tributaries coupled with direct observations in rearing areas indicate that incidences of residency were negligible. All individuals in this analysis were tagged at least three months prior to the time period of interest; therefore handling mortality and tag loss were also assumed to be negligible. For these reasons, we believe our estimates of Φ closely reflect true survival.
Coho included in the initial releases were comprised of all tagged coho that were detected at the HIG 5, HIG 3, or HIG 1 remote systems on or after 3/15/09 which was assumed to indicate that the individuals were alive. This included fish tagged in that vicinity as well as fish that migrated there from other locations prior to 3/15/09. Detections of coho at the HIG 5 antenna system were used as the initial release in the capture history matrix and were used to estimate survival of coho smolt emigrating between HIG 5 and HIG 3. The second encounter was comprised of detections at the HIG 3 antenna system, which included fish from the first release as well as coho not included in the first release. The third encounter was comprised of detections at the HIG 1 antenna system and fish from the first two releases and an additional release of all coho detected that were not included in the first two releases. The fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh encounters were comprised of detections at the three RM 0 antenna systems and RST. Survival was assumed to be 1 over these last four encounters, given their proximity to each other, which allowed for an overall estimation of detection probability for all RM 0 detection efforts during the spring of 2009.
To compensate for overdispersion, a quasilikelihood correction factor (ĉ) value of 1.54 was estimated using the median ĉ estimation method (Cooch and White 2006). The most general model allowed for difference in Φ in reaches 1, 2, and 3, Φ fixed to 1 in reaches 4, 5, and 6 (all RM 0 efforts), and allowed all p’s to be different. Using this model as a starting point, models with fewer parameters were constructed by constraining Φ and or p across some reaches and detection locations. These less parameterized models were used to test for a more parsimonious model.
33 We used Akaike’s information criterion corrected for small-sample bias (AICc) and adjusted for overdispersion (i.e., quasilikelihood AICc [QAICc]; (Burnham and Anderson 2002) as a statistical criterion to evaluate the competing models. Akaike weights (wi) are reported to provide a measure of each model’s relative likelihood of being the best model in the set given the data (Burnham and Anderson 2002). Rather than making inference from parameter estimates using only the best model (i.e., that with the smallest QAICc value) in the set, predicted parameter estimates were weighted based on model weights. Model-averaged parameter estimates account for model selection uncertainty in the estimated precision of the parameter and thus produce unconditional estimates of variance and standard error (Buckland et al.. 1997). 4.0 Results 4.1 Water Temperature Monitoring Results
To get an understanding of the range and characteristics of water temperature conditions in the Shasta River between RM 32.9 and RM 37.4, we looked at daily, weekly and seasonal maxima and minima.
Maximum Weekly Maximum Temperatures and Maximum Weekly Average Temperatures The maximum weekly maximum temperature (MWMT) and the maximum weekly average temperature (MWAT) for all sites are shown in Table 5. Figure 10 shows the MWMT at monitoring sites on the Shasta River main stem from the most upstream site at RM 37.4 (Fence) to the furthest downstream site at RM 32.9 (SBS 1).
The MWMT for each site is calculated by averaging the daily maximum temperatures for each week and selecting the week with the highest value for the study period, Julian Week 20 through 33 (5/14/08 through 8/19/08). The MWAT for each site is calculated by averaging the mean daily temperatures for each week and selecting the week with the highest value. A list of Julian weeks with equivalent calendar dates is shown in Appendix 21.
Maximum Daily Temperatures Exceeding 23 Degrees Centigrade The greatest number of days with maximum temperatures over 23 °C was at the most upstream temperature logger (Fence) on Hole in the Ground Ranch; sites HIG 5 and 4 never exceeded 23 °C (Figure 11). The number of days per site that the maximum daily temperatures exceeded 23° increased downstream of HIG 3.
34 Table 5. MWMTs and MWATs for all sites in 2008
River Start Site Mile Date MWMT JW MWAT JW Fence 37.4 5/28/2008 27.092 28 22.903 28 Clear Springs 37.0 6/5/2008 13.649 25 13.597 25 HIG 5 36.8 5/22/2008 20.576 28 18.934 28 HIG 4 36.3 5/21/2008 21.221 28 19.457 28 HIG 3 36.0 5/21/2008 22.471 28 19.563 28 HIG 2 35.2 5/14/2008 22.510 26 18.422 28 HIG 1 35.0 5/14/2008 22.951 26 19.169 28 SBS 6 34.9 3/27/2008 23.748 20 19.917 20 SBS 5 33.7 3/27/2008 24.400 20 20.205 28 SBS 4 33.6 3/27/2008 23.518 20 16.976 27 SBS 2 33.3 6/13/2008 23.274 28 18.242 28 SBS 1 32.9 4/23/2008 23.395 20 18.313 20 BSO N/A 4/1/2008 16.558 27 15.161 27 BSC N/A 3/27/2008 23.591 20 16.852 27 PC N/A 3/27/2008 27.033 28 22.266 28 Kettle Springs N/A 8/9/2008 14.581 33 13.965 33
Site Tributary 30
25
°C 20
15
10 FENCE CS HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1 PC SBS 6 SBS 5 BSC SBS 4 SBS 2 SBS 1
Figure 10. MWMTs for summer 2008 Shasta River from RM 32.9 to RM 37.4
35 80
70
60
50
40 Days 30
20
10
0 FENCEHIG 5HIG 4HIG 3HIG 2HIG 1SBS 6SBS 5SBS 4SBS 2SBS 1
Figure 11. Number of days by site in 2008 that maximum daily water temperatures were greater than or equal to 23 degrees
Diurnal Temperature Change The greatest diurnal change in temperature recorded at each site per week during Julian Weeks 13 through 33 is shown in Table 6.
Table 6. Maximum Diurnal Water Temperature Change by Site
Location JW Max Diurnal Date Maximum Minimum Diurnal Change FENCE 24 6/13/2008 25.258 13.185 12.073 Clear Springs 26 6/26/2008 13.69 13.594 0.096 HIG 5 24 6/13/2008 20.34 13.51 6.83 HIG 4 23 6/8/2008 18.699 13.233 5.466 HIG 3 28 7/13/2008 24.412 16.749 7.663 HIG 2 26 6/27/2008 25.404 15.151 10.253 HIG 1 25 6/23/2008 24.919 13.185 11.734 Parks Cr. 29 7/18/2008 26.891 16.558 10.333 SBS 6 15 4/12/2008 19.984 10.467 9.517 SBS 5 15 4/11/2008 19.77 8.593 11.177 BSC 18 5/5/2008 22.92 9.435 13.485 BSO 33 8/17/2008 17.938 13.305 4.633 SBS 4 18 5/5/2008 22.896 9.731 13.165 SBS 2 26 6/27/2008 24.219 12.992 11.227 SBS 1 17 4/26/2008 21.461 9.756 11.705 Kettle Springs 33 8/13/2008 14.673 13.377 1.296
36 Change in Location of Maximum Weekly Temperatures Hole in the Ground Ranch The maximum water temperatures per week at the HIG monitoring sites downstream of Clear Springs are presented in Appendix 4 and presented graphically in Appendix 5. The location of the weekly maximum temperature varies by week. Examples of this variability are shown in Figures 12 a-c.
Site Spring 30
25
°C 20
15
10 FENCECSHIG 5HIG 4HIG 3HIG 2HIG 1
Figure 12a. Maximum weekly water temperatures at HIG sites during Julian week 28
Site Spring 30
25
°C 20
15
10 FENCE CS HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1
Figure 12b. Maximum weekly water temperatures at HIG sites during Julian week 29
37 Site Spring 30
25
°C 20
15
10 FENCE CS HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1
Figure 12c. Maximum weekly water temperatures at HIG sites during Julian week 30
Daily Maxima We observed distinct spikes in water temperature that were limited to a single site. Examples of the change in location of daily maximum water temperatures at the HIG are shown in Figure 13 a-c. Figures 13 a-c show the temperature recorded at different sites at the same time on three different dates. On 7/13/08 at 1500, the highest water temperature downstream of Clear Springs was 24.41 degrees at HIG 3 (Figure 13a). On 7/16/08 at 1600, the highest temperature was 27.35 at HIG 1 (Figure 13b) and on 7/23/08 at 1700 the high temperatures at HIG 1, 2 and 3 were similar at 19.98, 19.17, and 19.65 respectively (Figure 13c).
30
25
°C 20
15
10 FENCE HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1
Figure 13a. Maximum daily water temperatures at HIG sites on 7/13/08 at 15:00
38 30
25
°C 20
15
10 FENCE HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1
Figure 13b. Maximum daily water temperatures at HIG sites on 7/16/08 at 16:00
30
25
°C 20
15
10 FENCE HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1
Figure 13c. Maximum daily water temperatures at HIG sites on 7/23/08 at 17:00
Figure 14 shows the water temperatures at six HIG sites over a twenty hour period beginning at 06:00 on 7/16/08. This is the same high temperature event shown in Figure 13b. The highest water temperature and the largest diurnal changes were recorded at HIG 1. The minimum recorded water temperature at HIG 1 for the day was 16.9 degrees at 06:00 and the maximum temperature was 27.4 at 15:00. The increase in temperature at HIG 1 was a localized event and was not the result of warm water from an upstream location.
39 °C 7/16/2008 6:00 °C 7/16/2008 10:00 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10 Fenc e HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1 Fenc e HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1 Site Site
°C 7/16/2008 14:00 °C 7/16/2008 18:00 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10 Fenc e HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1 Fenc e HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1 Site Site
°C 7/16/2008 22:00 °C 7/17/2008 2:00 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10 Fenc e HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1 Fenc e HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1 Site Site
Figure 14. Sequence of water temperatures at four hour intervals at Hole in the Ground Ranch sites from 06:00 on 7/16/08 through 02:00 on 7/17/08
Thermal Diversity The original intention of temperature logger deployment was to determine the basic thermal characteristics present throughout the upper Shasta River. Complying with a request from EII personnel, we deployed two loggers at each habitat site on Hole in the Ground Ranch and Shasta Springs Ranch. Comparative analyses of the paired loggers revealed unexpected variations in water temperature readings between loggers (Table 7). Some loggers were initially deployed a few feet apart (as occurred at sites HIG 2 and 5) but later deployed side-by-side to minimize variation. This thermal diversity was most pronounced at HIG 2. No attempt is made here to fully elucidate the causes of this diversity, nor is there an attempt to quantitatively define all thermal inputs present in the system. The existence of significant thermal diversity demonstrates the need for further study at these sites. The deployment of more loggers and ground-truthing of LIDAR generated tailwater maps are necessitated by these initial findings.
40 Table 7 displays the average maximum temperature difference of paired loggers per week. Values were generated by finding the difference in daily maximum temperatures between loggers. Daily minimum temperatures are the least variable between loggers. Minimum differences between loggers often approach or reach zero. The maximum differences are averaged by week and displayed in the table below. The numbers should not be read as correction values indicating one logger always recorded x degrees above or below another logger. These values simply show maximum temperature differences that may occur.
The logger recording consistently higher temperatures at each site was used to generate its corresponding site MWMT and MWAT values as well as all graphs and charts. Variable temperatures were not averaged, as each logger was recording actual temperatures. Although a temperature resembling the averages of the two differing logger readings may exist along some gradient in the thermal milieu, it can be stated that each device accurately depicts the localized thermal conditions present at any moment that juvenile salmonids, if present, must tolerate.
Table 7. Average Maximum Temperature Difference (°C) between Loggers per Week JW FENCE HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1 20 ------0.072 0.041 21 ----- 0.259 0.043 0.075 0.129 0.088 22 0.127 0.233 0.041 0.140 0.309 1.244 23 0.130 0.257 0.069 0.048 0.669 1.070 24 0.127 0.268 0.051 0.095 1.368 1.192 25 0.127 0.909 0.039 0.034 2.187 1.383 26 0.128 0.991 0.051 0.075 3.423 1.631 27 0.405 0.861 0.097 0.061 4.230 1.252 28 0.291 1.656 0.338 0.113 3.700 0.809 29 0.194 0.617 0.167 0.048 2.916 1.689 30 0.169 0.392 0.072 0.027 2.542 1.108 31 0.152 0.804 0.077 0.017 2.841 1.159 32 0.127 0.316 0.141 0.017 2.701 0.435 33 0.132 0.119 ----- 0.024 2.434 0.232
4.2 Flow Monitoring Results
Shasta Big Springs Ranch Flows in the Shasta River downstream of Big Spring Creek, as reported in Mount et al. 2009, are shown in Figure 15. These flows were calculated by adding the flow of Big Springs Creek, Parks Creek and the Shasta River upstream of Parks Creek.
41 Discharge (cfs) 160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0 3/23 4/22 5/22 6/21 7/21 8/20 9/19 10/19 11/18
Figure 12. Shasta River flow downstream of Big Springs Creek, 3/26/08 through 10/31/08
Hole in the Ground Ranch On 6/11/08, 7/8/08 and 7/21/08, we measured Shasta River discharge at HIG Sites 1 through 5 as shown in Figure 16a-c. Two water diversion structures are located upstream of site HIG 4; some diverted water was observed re-entering the Shasta River on five occasions, the dates and locations of these tailwater returns are shown in Figure 17.
Discharge (cfs) 10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00 HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1
Figure 16a. Discharge (cfs) measured in the Shasta River at five sites at the Hole in the Ground Ranch on June 11, 2008
42 Discharge (cfs)
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00 HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1
Figure 16b. Discharge (cfs) measured in the Shasta River at five sites at the Hole in the Ground Ranch on July 8, 2008
Discharge (cfs) 10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00 HIG 5HIG 4HIG 3HIG 2HIG 1
Figure 16c. Discharge (cfs) measured in the Shasta River at five sites at Hole in the Ground Ranch on July 21, 2008
Kettle Springs The discharge of Kettle Springs was measured on 8/6/08. The full discharge of the spring was being release in Kettle Springs Creek at this time and the impoundment was drained. The flow in the channel inside the impoundment was 4.88cfs and the flow in Kettle Springs Creek approximately 50 yards downstream from the impoundment was 5.84 cfs.
43
Figure 17. Partial diagram of some diversions, irrigation ditches and tailwater return sites observed along the Shasta River at Hole in the Ground Ranch in 2008.
4.3 Direct Observation Results Shasta Big Springs Ranch The mean number of coho, Chinook and steelhead per dive at each SBS site are shown in Figures 18 – 21. Appendix 8 shows the individual counts and standard deviation between counts for each date and location. The number of juvenile coho rearing at SBS 1-4 decreased during Julian 19. By week 22, SBS 2 was the only SBS site where coho were still rearing. We observed coho at SBS 2 throughout the study period.
44 mean count 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 27 Julian week coho steelhead Chinook
Figure 18. SBS 4: mean number of 0+ salmonids observed per dive count in the Shasta River on Shasta Big Springs Ranch in 2008
mean count 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 27 29 Julian week coho steelhead Chinook
Figure 19. SBS 3: mean number of 0+ salmonids observed per dive count in the Shasta River on Shasta Big Springs Ranch in 2008
45 mean count 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 27 29 Julian week coho steelhead Chinook
Figure 20. SBS 2: mean number of 0+ salmonids observed per dive count in the Shasta River on Shasta Big Springs Ranch in 2008
mean count 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 27 29 Julian week coho steelhead Chinook
Figure 21. SBS 1: mean number of 0+ salmonids observed per dive count in the Shasta River on Shasta Big Springs Ranch in 2008
Hole in the Ground Ranch The mean number of coho, Chinook and steelhead per dive at each HIG site are shown in Figures 22 – 26. Appendix 9 shows the individual counts and standard deviation between counts for each date and location. We observed coho at HIG sites 3, 4 and 5 throughout the study period. Coho were only observed at site 2 during Julian Week 21.
46 mean count 60
50
40
30
20
10
0 24 25 27 29 32 Julian week coho steelhead Chinook
Figure 22. HIG 5: mean number of 0+ salmonids observed per dive count in the Shasta River on Hole in the Ground Ranch in 2008
mean count 60
50
40
30
20
10
0 21 24 25 27 29 32 Julian week coho steelhead Chinook
Figure 23. HIG 4: mean number of 0+ salmonids observed per dive count in the Shasta River on Hole in the Ground Ranch in 2008
47 mean count 60
50
40
30
20
10
0 21 24 25 27 29 32 Julian week coho steelhead Chinook
Figure 24. HIG 3: mean number of 0+ salmonids observed per dive count in the Shasta River on Hole in the Ground Ranch in 2008
mean count 60
50
40
30
20
10
0 19 21 24 25 27 29 Julian week coho steelhead Chinook
Figure 25. HIG 2: mean number of 0+ salmonids observed per dive count in the Shasta River on Hole in the Ground Ranch in 2008
48 mean count 60
50
40
30
20
10
0 19 21 24 25 27 29 Julian week coho steelhead Chinook
Figure 26. HIG 1: mean number of 0+ salmonids observed per dive count in the Shasta River on Hole in the Ground Ranch in 2008
Kettle Springs Creek On 08/06/2008, we counted the number of salmonids rearing at the outfall of Kettle Springs (Photo 12). Counts were made by three divers making separate passes through the pool. 0+ coho counts ranged from 23 to 52 (mean = 34), 0+ steelhead counts ranged from 23 – 64 (mean 46). No Chinook were observed.
4.4 PIT Tagging Results
Capture and Tagging Nelson Ranch (RM 32) Capture and Tagging Effort, Spring/Summer 2008 A total of 1,331 untagged BY2007 coho were captured at the Nelson Ranch from February to July of 2008, of which 509 were implanted with PIT tags. A total of 279 coho were captured with the RST and 97 of these were implanted with PIT tags. A total of 1,052 coho were captured with the fyke nets and 412 of these were implanted with PIT tags. The first BY2007 coho salmon was captured on February 21 and the first was PIT tagged on April 16. See Figure 27 for a summary of Nelson Ranch RST and fyke BY2007 coho catch by Julian week (JW) through the spring and summer of 2008. Recaptures of PIT tagged fish were known whereas recaptures of unmarked fish were likely but not known. See Appendix 10 for total 2008 and 2009 Nelson Ranch salmonid RST and fyke catch data. There was an increase in the number of coho captured in the traps during mid May of 2008 (JW 18). This increase coincided with water temperatures as high as 24˚C and air temperatures in excess of 37˚C. In an effort to reduce mortality associated with handling fish at these high water temperatures, tagging was suspended on 5/17/08 and 5/18/08.
49 900
800
700
600
500 Released Untagged
Tag Implanted 400 Number of Coho
300
200
100
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011121314151617181920212223242526 Julian Week
Figure 27. Total BY2007 coho catch at Nelson Ranch (RM 32) with the RST and fyke nets in the spring and early summer of 2008 by julian week.
Quality Control Of the 84 coho that were tagged and held overnight (approximately 24 hours) as part of the quality control evaluation, one experienced mortality and 83 (98.8%) appeared healthy (exhibiting good swimming behavior and showed no signs of ill effects), and were released back to the river. No shed tags were observed from the 84 holdovers (Appendix 11). Overall, short- term tag loss and tagging mortality did not appear to be significant.
Nelson Ranch (RM 32) Capture and Tagging Effort, Fall 2008, Spring 2009 Intermittent RST and fyke sets during the fall of 2008 resulted in the capture and tagging of 18 BY2007 coho. In the spring of 2009 a total of 16 BY2007 coho were captured and tagged.
Tagging at Rearing Locations Reconnaissance dives revealed the presence of rearing coho in several areas of the Shasta River and its tributaries during the summer of 2008. Total coho estimates are rough approximations based on opportunistic reconnaissance snorkel surveys throughout the summer of 2008 and are subject to constraints such as water clarity and available cover. Results of capture efforts in these locations are summarized below and are shown in Table 8.
50 SBS Dive Site 1 (RM 32.9) In the spring of 2008, an estimated 50 coho were observed rearing at SBS dive site 1 (RM 32.9). 13 of these were captured with the hand net and implanted with PIT tags.
HIG dive sites 1-5 (RM 35.0-36.8) In the late spring and summer of 2008, snorkel divers observed an estimated 1,000 coho rearing from RM 35 to 36.8. A total of 223 coho salmon were captured and tagged in this reach. Minnow trap and hand net efforts in the spring of 2008 (5/28 to 6/25) from RM 36 to 36.8 resulted in the tagging of 59 coho. Fyke and seine efforts in beaver pond habitats at RM 36 and 36.8 during the fall of 2008 (8/20 to 12/10) resulted in the capture and tagging of 141 coho. Seining efforts in two pool habitats, approximately 100 yards upstream and downstream of HIG dive site 2 (RM 35.2) resulted in the tagging of 23 coho in the fall of 2008.
Big Springs Creek In the summer of 2008 snorkel divers observed an estimated 200 coho rearing at the outfall of Big Springs Lake and 86 of these fish were captured with a seine and tagged during three occasions in the late summer and fall of 2008 (8/7, 9/8, 11/13). Snorkel divers also observed an estimated 50 coho rearing at a bridge crossing at Big Spring Creek (RM 1.5) in late fall of 2008, of which 23 were captured with a seine and tagged.
Kettle Springs In the summer of 2008, snorkel divers observed an average of 34 coho rearing at the outfall of Kettle Springs. At this location, seven coho were captured with hand nets and tagged in the late summer and fall of 2008.
Table 8. Results of tagging in rearing locations
Summary of BY2007 Coho Tagging from Rearing Areas in 2008 Tagging Location Coho Tagged Tagging Month Gear SBS Dive Site 1 (RM 32.9) 13 4, 5 Hand net HIG Dive Site 2 Vicinity (RM 35.2) 23 9,10,12 Seine HIG Dive Site 3 Vicinity (RM 36) 87 5, 6, 11, 12 Hand net, Fyke HIG Dive Site 5 Vicinity (RM 36.8) 113 6, 8, 9, 10, 12 Seine, Fyke, Minnow trap, Hand net Big Springs Outfall 87 8, 9, 11 Seine Big Springs Creek RM 1.5 23 12 Seine, Hand net Kettle Springs 7 8, 9, 10 Hand net Total 236
Remote Detection System Performance Overview In the early stages of this study, remote PIT tag detection systems were still in developmental stages and their performance during the spring and summer of 2008 was marginal. Improvements in the operational and structural aspects of the systems throughout the study resulted in much greater detection capability at each station. The availability of newly improved equipment, combined with permission to access additional habitat areas further upstream, created opportunities to deploy additional remote detection systems in the fall of 2008. Certain locations
51 served very well for the application of remote PIT tag detection technology. At other locations the systems did not perform well because of poor site conditions related to channel characteristics (high velocities and deep water), high debris loads of aquatic vegetation, or inadequate access to the sites. Several antenna systems were removed during the study for these reasons, and provided minimal data. Antenna system performance at each station is summarized below. See Appendix 12 for dates of antenna system installation and removal by location. Figure 28 shows locations of antenna systems in the upper Shasta River that provided important data for this study.
Figure 28. Upper Shasta antenna system locations (SRM = Shasta River Mile)
52 RM 0 (Mouth of Shasta River) Detection coverage at the Shasta’s mouth was most often an estimated 30% of the river’s width throughout 2008, and varied between 0% and 80%. High flow and debris load events in the spring of 2008 caused periods of poor or non operation, as did equipment malfunction and interference amongst antennas. The read range of the antennas was often less than 100% of their field, but with shallow water depth in the summer months, the entire water column could still be covered. Positioning of the antennas was altered several times as flows changed due to deployment of additional and alternate equipment, and to accommodate the installation of the Department’s Klamath River Project’s (KRP) adult salmonid counting weir in the fall of 2008. This partial and inconsistent coverage continued through to the winter of 2008, when the three- system setup was deployed. At that point coverage of each system increased to about 80% of their river transects, and consistent operation was obtained. This high performance during the spring of 2009 provided key data as tagged coho smolts emigrated from the Shasta.
RM 29, 32.1, SBS 1 (RM 32.9), and Big Springs Creek RM 1.6 These systems were subject to the aforementioned limitations in performance and provided minimal data. They were removed during the study for these reasons as well as to make equipment available for locations of higher priority.
Meamber Ranch (RM 15) and Nelson Ranch (RM 32) These systems varied widely in their detection capability throughout the study as a result of equipment performance, power station failures, high flow and debris loads. Configuration and number of antennas changed on several occasions, as alternate and additional designs were deployed. These systems operated at least intermittently throughout the entire study and provided some useful data.
HIG 3 (RM 36), HIG 5 (RM 36.8), Big Springs Outfall, and Kettle Springs Outfall These systems were deployed upon tagging of coho in these locations. They were subject to some limitations, but overall performed consistently throughout the study and provided useful data regarding the identified rearing areas.
HIG 1 (RM 35), Parks Creek RM 0, 4 These systems were installed in the fall of 2008 (Parks RM 4 in winter 2009) and performed well throughout their deployment, providing key data regarding migration timing. The configuration of antennas in these systems allowed for directional detection of individual tagged coho.
Detection of Tagged Coho Detection of Nelson Ranch (RM 32) Spring/Summer 2008 Tagged Coho Of the 509 coho tagged in the spring and early summer of 2008 at RM 32, six were encountered at RM 0 later that season (Table 9). Recapture and detection of tagged coho at RM 32 was common throughout the period of tagging in the spring and early summer of 2008. Encounters here virtually ceased though, by mid summer. Forty-eight of the 509 were later encountered at upstream locations (Table 10). Detailed encounter histories for these individuals can be found in Appendix 13. Eighty-one of the 509 were encountered at RM 0 in the spring of 2009 when they left the system as smolts, 51 of which had not been encountered since tagging.
53 Table 9. Date of BY2007 coho tagging at Nelson Ranch (RM 32) and encounter at RM 0 in the spring and early summer of 2008.
2008 Nelson Ranch (RM 32) Tagged BY2007 Coho Emigrants Fork length at Tagging Tagging Date RM 0 Encounter Date Size at Recapture 77 5/16/08 6/18/08 93 68 5/16/08 6/26/08 105 87 5/17/08 5/24/08 NA 67 5/17/08 6/28/08 NA 97 5/19/08 5/24/08 NA 103 6/11/08 6/16/08 109
Table 10. Numbers of Nelson Ranch (RM 32) spring/summer 2008 tagged coho first detected at upstream antenna systems by season. Some individuals are represented more than once.
Season of First HIG 1 HIG 3,5 (RM Big Springs Parks Creek Parks Creek Kettle Springs Detection (RM 35) 36,36.8) Outfall RM 0 RM 4 Outfall Spring/Summer 2008 17 4 Fall/ Winter 2008/2009 13 4 4 Spring 2009 14(downstream) 5
Detection of Nelson Ranch (RM 32) Fall 2008, Spring 2009 Tagged Coho Of the 18 coho tagged at the Nelson Ranch site in the fall of 2008, four were later encountered at upstream locations (Appendix 14), and a total of nine were encountered as they left the Shasta in the spring of 2009. Of the 16 coho tagged at the Nelson Ranch site in the spring of 2009, nine were encountered as they left the Shasta in the spring of 2009.
Detection of SBS Dive Site 1 (RM 32.9) Tagged Coho Performance of the antenna at this location was inconsistent. Of the 13 coho tagged in this location, six were detected by the antenna system, and none were detected there after 5/11/08. One of the 13 was encountered at RM 0 as it left the Shasta in the spring of 2009.
Detection of HIG 3-5 (RM 36-36.8) Tagged Coho Detection histories of tagged individual coho in this reach that were encountered at least one week after tagging are shown in Appendix 15. Coho tagged in the RM 36-36.8 area were not detected elsewhere until smolt migration began to take place in the late winter of 2009, with the exception of one. Portions of coho from these groups were used for our smolt survival analysis and detection probability estimations which are addressed in later sections. The number of individual coho detected by Julian Week at the HIG 5 antenna system is shown in Figure 29 and at the HIG 3 antenna system in Figure 30. Lack of detections at both sites during Julian Week 53 was a result of power station failures. Of the 113 coho tagged at HIG 5, 28 were encountered at RM 0 when they left the Shasta River as smolts in the spring of 2009, as were 37 of the 87 tagged at HIG 3.
54 Individuals Detected 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 Julian Week, 2008-2009
Figure 29. Numbers of individual coho detected at the HIG 5 antenna system by julian week.
Individuals Detected
60 50 40 30 20 10 0 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 Julian Week, 2008-2009
Figure 30. Numbers of individual coho detected at the HIG 3 antenna system by julian week.
Detection of HIG 2 Vicinity (RM 35.2) Tagged Coho Detection histories of coho tagged at RM 35.2 are shown in Appendix 16, and include three individuals that moved upstream to RM 36 and six that moved up Parks Creek prior to spring 2009 emigration. Of the 23 total coho tagged in this reach, 7 were encountered at RM 0 when they left the Shasta River as smolts in the spring of 2009. A portion of this tagging group was used for survival and detection probability analysis, which are addressed in later sections.
55 Detection of Big Springs Creek Outfall Tagged Coho Detection of individual tagged coho from Big Springs outfall by JW at the antenna system there is shown in Figure 31. Spikes in detections in JW 32, 36, and 46 represent the three tagging events. Of the 87 coho tagged at the site, 73 were last detected there in the fall of 2008, nine were last detected there in the winter, and five were last detected there in the spring of 2009. Eight coho that left Big Springs outfall in the fall of 2008 were detected at other antenna systems. Those documented movements are summarized in Table 11. Some individuals are included in more than one category. More detailed detection histories for coho tagged at Big Spring outfall that were encountered at least one month after tagging are displayed in Appendix 17. 32 of the 87 Big Spring outfall tagged coho were encountered at RM 0 when they left the Shasta River as smolts in the spring of 2009.
Individuals Detected
60 50 40 30 20 10 0 32 34 36 38 40 42 46 48 50 52 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 20 Julian Week 2008‐2009
Figure 31. Numbers of individual coho detected at the Big Springs Creek outfall antenna system by julian week in 2008 and 2009.
Table 11. Numbers of Big Springs outfall tagged coho detected at other locations, excluding those in spring 2009 at RM 15 (smolts). Season of First RM RM Parks Kettle Springs Detection 15 35 Creek RM 0 Outfall Fall 2008 2 Winter 2008/2009 2 2 Spring 2009 NA 4
Detection of Big Spring Creek RM 1.5 Tagged Coho Of the 23 coho tagged at Big Springs Creek RM 1.5, nine were encountered at RM 0 when they left the Shasta River as smolts in the spring of 2009, two of which were also encountered at the Parks Creek RM 0 antenna system. Detection histories for coho tagged at Big Springs RM 1.5 that were later encountered are shown in Appendix 18.
Detection of Kettle Springs Tagged Coho Tagged coho remained at Kettle Springs until the late fall of 2008, when they were no longer detected at that location. Detection histories of individual tagged coho from Kettle Springs
56 outfall are shown in Appendix 19. Two of the seven Kettle Springs outfall tagged coho were encountered at RM 0 when they left the Shasta River as smolts in the spring of 2009.
Weir 2009 Encounters (RM 0) Of the 896 total BY2007 coho tagged, 215 were encountered as they emigrated from the Shasta in the spring of 2009 as smolts. Table 12 displays these fish by tagging location with total number tagged at each location, and the expanded estimate based on the detection probability estimates from the next section (point estimates for the two upstream antenna systems and RST multiplied together and subtracted from 1). Timing of RM 0 encounters by day is shown in Figure 32. Growth since tagging of smolts recaptured with the RM 0 RST (by FL) is shown in Appendix 20.
Table 12. Total number of fish tagged by location with number and percentage encountered as they left the Shasta as smolts in the spring of 2009, including expansions based on detection probability estimation of 90.3% at RM 0 during the spring of 2009.
Expanded Number Encountered Number Tag Group Tagged at RM 0, 2009 % Encountered Expanded % RM 32 Spring/Summer 2008 509 81 15.91% 88.86 17.00% Big Springs Outfall 87 32 36.78% 35.10 40.35% Big Springs Creek RM 1.5 23 9 39.13% 9.87 42.93% RM 32.9 13 1 7.69% 1.10 8.44% Kettle Springs 7 2 28.57% 2.19 31.34% RM 35.2 23 7 30.43% 7.68 33.39% RM 36 87 37 42.53% 40.59 46.65% RM 36.8 113 28 24.78% 30.72 27.18% RM 32 Fall 2008 Tagged 18 9 50.00% 9.87 54.85% RM 32 Spring 2009 Tagged 16 9 56.25% 9.87 61.71% Total 896 215 24.00% 235.86 26.32%
Coho Detected 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 2/26 3/5 3/12 3/19 3/26 4/2 4/9 4/16 4/23 4/30 5/7 5/14 5/21 Date
Figure 32. Plot of number of coho detected at RM 0 in spring 2009 by day.
57 Spring Emigration from HIG From 3/15/09 to 5/30/09, 80, 51, and 20 coho were first detected at the HIG 5, HIG 3, and HIG 1 antenna system and were used as the first, second, and third release in our survival study. Five candidate models were fitted to the data (Table 13). Based on QAICc values, the best model allowed Φ in reaches 1, 2, and 3 to be different, Φ in reaches 4, 5 and 6 to 1, and all p to be different (i.e., our most general model). This model accounted for 51% of the model weight assigned to the candidate models. Model-averaged Φ estimates indicate a substantially lower survival in reaches between HIG 5 and HIG 3 and between HIG 3 and HIG 1 than the reach between HIG 1 and RM 0, given their perspective lengths (Table 14). Model averaged p estimates are presented in Table 15, Table 16 summarizes all results, and Figure 33 illustrates the results in a diagram.
Table 13. Akaike’s information criterion corrected for small sample size (AICc) and overdispersion (quasilikelihood AICc [QAICc]; overdispersion parameter estimate= 1.54); values were used to select the best model from among five candidate models of survival (Φ) and recapture probability (p) for coho smolts emigrating from rearing habitats on HIG, Shasta River from 3/15/09 to 5/30/09 (period symbol = parameter is constant over the given attribute). The best model is presented first: ∆QAICc represents the difference between the QAICc value of a model and that of the best model. Akaike weights (wi) provide a measure of each model’s relative weight or likelihood of being the best model in the set given the data. Number of parameters is the total number that is theoretically estimable by the model. Number of Model QAICc ∆QAICc wi Parameters -2log(L) Φ(reach 1,2,3 different, 4,5,6 fixed to 1.0), p(all different) 520.227 0 0.507 9 772.73 Φ(reach 1,2,3 different 4,5,6 fixed to 1.0), p(3,4,6 are constrained) 521.89 1.66 0.221 7 781.71 Φ(reach 1,2,3 same, 4,5,6 fixed to 1.0), p(all different) 522.251 2.02 0.184 7 782.27 Φ(reach 1,2 same, 3 different, 4,5,6 fixed to 1.0), p(all different) 523.72 3.49 0.088 8 781.33 Φ(.),p(.) 540.055 19.83 0 2 825.48
Table 14. Estimated apparent survival of coho in three Shasta River reaches from 3/15/09 to 5/30/09, including standard error and confidence intervals. 95% Confidence Interval Reach Length Apparent Standard Reach (Miles) Survival Φ Error Lower Upper 1 (HIG 5- HIG 3) 0.5 0.844 0.077 0.632 0.944 2 (HIG 3- HIG 1) 1 0.689 0.066 0.547 0.802 3 (HIG 1- RM 0) 35 0.801 0.063 0.648 0.897
58 Table 15. Estimated detection probability of PIT tag antenna systems and RST from 3/15/09 to 5/30/09. 95% Confidence Interval Detection Detection Standard Location Probability p Error Lower Upper HIG 3 0.836 0.067 0.663 0.930 HIG 1 0.981 0.022 0.820 0.998 Weir C 0.568 0.085 0.399 0.722 Weir B 0.481 0.068 0.351 0.613 RST 0.358 0.069 0.237 0.501
Table 16. Number of fish released by location, and point estimates of apparent survival (Φ) and detection probability (p). Encounter HIG Reach HIG Reach HIG Reach WEIR Reach WEIR Reach Reach Locations 5 1 3 2 1 3 C 4 B 5 RST 6 WEIR A Approx Reach .5 1 35 Length miles mile miles 1800 feet 60 feet 120 feet Releases 80 51 20 Φ Estimates 0.844 0.689 0.801 Φ set to 1 Φ set to 1 Φ set to 1 not not p Estimates estimable 0.836 0.981 0.568 0.481 0.358 estimable
Figure 33. Diagram (not to scale) of encounter locations, reach lengths, and apparent survival estimates, including 95% confidence intervals.
5.0 Discussion
5.1 Water Temperature Monitoring We observed a number of factors that affected water temperatures within the 4.5 mile section of the Shasta River monitored in 2008 including: periodic releases of water from Lake Shastina, surface diversions at RM 37.4 and 36.1, inflow from cold springs, tailwater return points and inflow from Parks Creek and Big Springs Creek.
59 Shasta Big Springs Ranch For four consecutive days in Julian Week 20, 5/16/08 through 5/19/08, the maximum daily water temperatures were greater than 24° C at SBS Sites 1-4. The diurnal change in temperatures of the Shasta River upstream of Big Springs Creek and Big Springs Creek and the Shasta River at SBS sites 1 and 4 during this period are shown in Figure 34. This large diurnal change in temperature was the result of a combination of factors including maximum daily air temperatures over 33 º C, degraded channel condition, a lack of riparian vegetation in Big Springs Creek and flood irrigation (Mount et al. 2009). Because of its shallow depth and lack of shading, flood irrigation water has the potential to warm rapidly during hot weather. Flood irrigation was in full operation on the SBS Ranch on 5/17/08 with tailwater returning to Big Spring Creek (Jeffres 2009). Temperature loggers upstream at HIG 1 and HIG 2 also recorded maximum daily water temperatures over 23° C during this period.
°C 5/16/2008 17:00 7:00 28
26
24
22 20
18
16
14
12
10 HIG 2 HIG 1 SBS 6 SBS 5 SBS 4 SBS 1 Site
Figure 34. Diurnal temperature change that occurred on 5/16/08 Shasta River between HIG 2 and SBS1
Hole in the Ground Ranch The highest and lowest MWMT were observed at adjacent monitoring stations, 22.90° C at (RM 37.4) and 13.59 degrees at Clear Springs (RM 37.0). During the irrigation season, water at RM 37.4 is a mix of water that has been stored in Lake Shastina, tailwater from upstream flood irrigation and approximately 2 cfs of 13° C spring water. The stored water from Lake Shastina is delivered via the Shasta River channel for use by irrigators on the upper Shasta River. The MWMT at the Fence site was the highest of any measured in this study (27.09° C). Water from Clear Springs was a constant 13.6° C. Water at HIG Site 5 is a mix of these two water sources. This cold water reduced the MWMT at site 5 by 6.22 degrees from the MMWT at the Fence line site: 26.80 to 20.57, respectively.
Increase in water temperatures downstream of HIG 5 We observed an increasing trend in the MWMTs, the number of days that the maximum water temperatures were greater or equal to 23° C and the maximum diurnal temperature change at sites downstream of HIG 5. There were changes in the location of the weekly maximum temperatures downstream of Clear Springs including periodic spikes in water temperature up to 27º C at HIG sites 1 through 3, (RM 35.2 through 36.3). These were localized events, as shown
60 in the sequence of graphs at four hour intervals on 7/16/08 (Figure 14). Although HIG 2 is only 0.1 miles upstream of HIG 1, it did not show a similar increase in temperature on 7/16/08. The spike in temperature at HIG 1 does not appear to be the result of warm water moving downstream from an upstream location. The elevated water temperature events occurred for a short period of time, typically for two or three days. The characteristics of these abrupt increases in water temperatures suggest that they were caused by warm water entering the river at specific points.
Figures 35 and 36 are aerial photos that show Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR)-generated tailwater neighborhoods for the irrigated pastures along the Shasta River from HIG Sites 1-5.
LIDAR is similar to RADAR but uses laser pulses as opposed to radio waves. By measuring the time taken for an emitted laser pulse to reach an object and reflect back to a receiving detector, the distance to an object may be determined. If the exact location of the detector is known and this is combined with multiple ranges to a specific object, a three dimensional image of the object, or terrain, can be visualized. In this case, an aircraft equipped with a laser coupled with navigational systems emits laser pulses hundreds of times each second over a swath of terrain. The laser scans the terrain, and when this data is combined with the navigational and positional data of the aircraft, detailed coordinates of the surveyed terrain are generated. All data is collected and delivered in a digital format. The data can easily be imported into a number of GIS programs for further analysis. The data points consist of x, y and z coordinates that can be used in GIS programs to produce digital elevation models (DEM) that can be used to make highly detailed terrain surface models. These models can be coupled with aerial images to make orthomaps.
In January 2008, Terrapoint LLC conducted LIDAR flights along the length of the Shasta River as well as major tributaries for the Shasta Valley Resource Conservation District (SVRCD). Terrain surface models and orthomaps were generated for the purpose of determining tailwater pour points and corresponding tailwater watersheds or neighborhoods.
61
Figure 35. LIDAR generated tailwater neighborhoods and pour points for HIG sites 3, 4 and 5
62
Figure 36. LIDAR generated tailwater neighborhoods and pour points for HIG sites 1 and 2.
In Figures 35 and 36, the individual neighborhoods are outlined in black and the pour points are indicated as red dots. The neighborhoods in Figures 35 and 36 include drainage from entirely non irrigated terrain as in the upslope area at the bottom of Figure 35 and from neighborhoods that include upslope area as well as irrigated pasture. Some of the neighborhoods include only irrigated pasture. The orthomaps show topographic features and the location of pour points if water was applied to the neighborhoods. We believe that water temperatures were warmer and less stable at HIG 1 and HIG 2 due in part to the effects of irrigation tailwater returning to the Shasta River. The date, duration, quantity and temperature of tailwater returning at the pour points are needed to determine the specific effects of tailwater within this reach.
5.2 Flow Monitoring
Hole in the Ground Ranch The short sampling period and limited access resulted in a small number of daily in-stream flow calculations (5 or 6 calculations per site). Measurements on June 11th, July 8th and July 21st provided the most useful data for comparison because mainstem flow transects were measured at all five sites on the same day. Although simultaneous measurements of discharge at all five
63 transects would be preferable, we believe the discharge calculated accurately depicts hydrological trends at the monitoring sites during the sampling period.
The highest mean discharge was measured at the farthest upstream transect, HIG 5 (mean =7.25cfs, n=5). The lowest calculated discharge varied by day between sites HIG 4 and HIG 3 (Appendix 7); but mean discharge at HIG 3 was lowest and the least variable (1.30 cfs, n=5, δ=0.23). Discharge at sites HIG 2 and HIG 1 was moderate in comparison to the upstream sites (Appendix 7); with the exception of July 8th when discharge was greatest at HIG 1 (6.36cfs). Direct observation of diversion locations and points of tailwater return suggest the low rates of discharge at sites HIG 4 and HIG 3 are due, at least in part, to water removed from the channel at the cone-screen diversion. Likewise, we attribute the rebound in discharge witnessed at downstream sites HIG 2 and HIG 1 as due, at least in part, to tailwater returning to the river from water diverted at the cone-screen or upper diversions. Additional monitoring as well as information such as dates and quantities of water diversions, locations and duration of flood irrigation, and exact locations of all tailwater return locations would be necessary to make more definitive statements on area hydrology.
5.3 Direct Observation Coho distribution and river temperatures
Spring distribution In April of 2008, we observed 0+ coho rearing in suitable habitat throughout the SBS study reach (RM 32.9 – 33.6). Figure 37 shows the temperature conditions at SBS 1 during the last week of April 2008. The highest recorded temperature at SBS 1 typically occurred at 1700 hours. The temperature at 1700 during the last week of April ranged from 17.08 to 21.46 with 75% of the records being less than or equal to 20.98.
30 30
25 25
20 20
°C °C
15 15
10 10
5 5 01234567891011121314151617181920212223 01234567891011121314151617181920212223 Hour Hour Figure 37. SBS 1 Hourly Water Temperature Figure 38. SBS 1 Hourly Water Temperature Variability for April Variability for May
64 Spring 2008 migration As air temperatures rose in mid May, so did the water temperatures at the monitoring sites on the Shasta River. During May, water temperature at SBS 1 at 1700 hours ranged from 15.36 to 24.6 degrees C, with 75% of the records being less than or equal to 21.68 (Figure 38). From 5/16/09 through 5/19/09 the daily maximum water temperatures at SBS 1 were over 24 degrees. The last observation of coho at SBS 1 was on 5/21/09.
In mid May some of the coho tagged at the Nelson Ranch RM (32) moved upstream and showed a preference for the conditions at HIG 3 over HIG 2. Figure 39 shows the temperature conditions at HIG Site 2 for 5/14/08 through 5/31/08. During this period water temperatures ranged from 14.96 to 23.32 degrees C. At 1700, 75% of the records were less than or equal to 22.13. Figure 40 shows the temperature conditions at HIG Site 3 during the same period. The warmest water at this site was recorded at 1600. Water temperatures ranged from 13.76 to 20.43 with 75% of the records less than or equal to 16.12 degrees.
30 30
25 25
20 20
°C °C
15 15
10 10
5 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Hour Hour Figure 39. HIG 2 Hourly Water Temperature Figure 40. HIG 3 Hourly Water Temperature Variability for May Variability for May
It appears that the displacement of coho from SBS 1, 2 and 3 in May was the result of a short term spike in the maximum daily water temperatures rather than differences in temperatures from the 25th to 75th percentile. Maximum daily water temperatures at SBS 1 increased from 21.46 in April to 24.60 in May. This increase of over 3° C in the maximum daily temperatures occurred for four days consecutive days. The difference in the 75th percentile, between April (20.98) and May (21.68) was only 0.7° C. indicating that for the majority of the time, temperature conditions at SBS 1 were similar in April and May.
During May 2008, the most apparent difference in water temperature conditions between HIG 3 where coho reared and HIG 2 where they did not, is the temperature of the 75th percentile, 16.12° C and 22.13° C respectively. This is a surprising difference in that HIG 2 and HIG 3 are only 0.8 miles apart and indicates that significant thermal loading occurred between HIG 2 and 3.
65 A study of the effects of water temperature on juvenile coho in Redwood Creek determined that stream temperatures appeared to be a dominant factor in controlling their distribution (Madej et al. 2006). In this study, juvenile coho were not found in stream reaches where the MWMT ranged from 23 to 27° C. Other effects of elevated water temperatures on juvenile coho include significant decreases in swimming speed at temperatures greater than 20° C (Griffiths and Alderice1972) and cessation growth at temperatures over 20.3° C (Bell 1973).
30 30
25 25
20 20
°C °C
15 15
10 10
5 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 01234567891011121314151617181920212223 Hour Hour
Figure 41. SBS 1 Hourly Water Temperature Figure 42. SBS 1 Hourly Water Temperature Variability for July Variability for August
Prior to the increased water temperatures in mid-May, we noticed that rearing coho were associated with velocity shelters and cover provided by water birch trees and woody debris. These habitat elements were still present and functioning after water temperatures increased and coho were displaced. Whisker plots for July and August at SBS1 were surprisingly cool (Figures 41 and 42). Although temperatures in July and August were cooler than temperatures in April, coho did not return to the rearing habitat at the SBS sites 1, 3 and 4. Hourly water temperature variability at all sites for the season are shown in Appendix 6.
Summer 2008 Distribution of Coho All of the locations in which we found coho rearing over the summer in 2008 were associated with cold springs including the pool at the outfall of Big Springs Lake, a 1.02mile reach of the Shasta River downstream of Clear Springs HIG sites 5, 4, and 3. Juvenile coho were also observed rearing during the summer in Kettle Springs Creek at the outfall of Kettle Springs, in Big Springs Creek at outfall of Big Springs Lake and at a small coldwater seep on the mainstem Shasta River at River Mile 33.3.
HIG 5 had the best rearing habitat for juvenile coho of any site in the Shasta River mainstem study reach. Features included an abundance of woody debris and vegetation for cover, and a nearly complete canopy cover over the river of water birch and alder trees. An abandoned Beaver dam 350 feet downstream of HIG 5 has created a pool over 500 feet long. Water velocities were
66 slow enough for the fish to easily hold their position in the channel while food drifted to them. Because the site is directly downstream of Clear Springs, it had the lowest MWMT of all of the mainstem sites (20.52° C).
5.4 PIT Tagging Discussion
Nelson Ranch Tagged Coho An initial movement of BY 2007 coho fry was documented by an increase in their catch at the Nelson Ranch traps (RM 32) in mid May of 2008. The origin of these captured coho is not known. Of the coho tagged with this effort that were again recaptured or remotely detected, one group left the Shasta River as 0+ that same season, while a second group migrated to upstream habitats. Poor detection capability and lack of system deployment at key locations during the spring and summer of 2008 made the size of these groups difficult to identify with confidence. Detections of individuals from this group in the fall and winter of 2008 and 2009 at Parks Creek RM 0, 4, Kettle Springs, and RM 34.9 suggests that there was redistribution of coho during the fall. A third group of these tagged coho was not encountered again until they left the Shasta River as smolts in 2009. With increased detection capability at RM 0 at that time, the number encountered there likely reflects a more accurate estimate of the number of individuals in this group. These data suggests that other cold water summer rearing habitats exist that were not monitored during this study. Possible locations include Bridge Field Spring, a tributary to Parks Creek, lower areas of Big Springs Creek, and other areas on the main stem Shasta River.
HIG Tagged Coho Coho had already colonized HIG (RM 34.5-36.8) when the first reconnaissance dives took place there in the spring of 2008. It is not known whether successful coho spawning seeded this reach directly or if all coho present migrated there from other locations. Encounters of individuals here that were tagged at Nelson Ranch (RM 32) indicate that at least a portion of the population migrated there from other locations. Coho tagged in the HIG 3-5 (RM 36-36.8) area tended to remain there until smolt migration took place in the spring of 2009. This habitat was associated with abundant woody debris and macrophyte cover in contrast with the other identified summer rearing areas. Two beaver dam impoundments also existed in this reach during the study. The first, located below HIG 5 (RM 36.8), was in place upon first access to the property and appeared abandoned throughout the study. The second, located below HIG 3 (RM 36) was erected in the fall of 2008, and drastically altered the habitat for several hundred yards upstream of it. What had existed as riffle-pool type habitat with marginal woody debris became pond type habitat with submerged woody debris. Coho were observed in schools of approximately 20 to 100 throughout the fall and winter of 2008/2009 in these pond habitats.
Spring Emigration from HIG Based on detection data, coho smolt survival was lowest on the HIG reaches of the main stem Shasta River. This is a significant loss considering the population status of Shasta River coho and the limited number of locations where coho are able to successfully rear from fry to smolt. The additive effect of these low survival rates are especially significant to populations migrating from areas high in the watershed. For example, if the point estimates are applied to 100 coho smolts emigrating from the HIG 5 area, that number is reduced to 84 by the time they reach HIG 3, 58 by HIG 1, and 46 by the time they reach the Shasta River’s mouth. The temporal trend in detections of coho from the first and second releases at HIG 1 indicates that successful
67 emigration peaked from approximately 4/20/09 to 5/10/09 (Figure 43). The date of last detection of individuals from the first and second releases not detected at HIG 1 appears to be correlated with successful emigration, suggesting that mortality may have been tied to movement. Though the specific source of these mortalities is not known, we have identified several potential factors based on observations during the spring of 2009. These include low flow conditions, elevated water temperatures, predation and physical barriers to emigration, all of which may be linked or compounded by each other.
Dates of Last Detection
90 80 70 60 50 HIG 1 40 HIG 3/5 30 20 10
Cummulative Number of Coho of Number Cummulative 0 4/5 5/3 3/15 3/22 3/29 4/12 4/19 4/26 5/10 5/17 5/24 5/31
Date
Figure 43. Cumulative numbers of coho from the first and second releases that were detected at HIG 1 (successful HIG emigrants, solid line) and last detected at HIG 3 or 5 antenna systems, not detected at HIG 1 (suspected HIG mortalities, broken line).
The effects of low flow due to irrigation practices on HIG were documented in 2008, and were observed again during the spring of 2009. The stage height of the impoundment at HIG 3 dropped approximately six inches once irrigation season began, and observed flows in the channel below the beaver dams were low relative to before the start of irrigation season (Photo 7, 20, 21). The water temperatures encountered by smolts emigrating through sites HIG 4, HIG 3 and HIG 2 from 3/15/09 through 5/31/09 are shown in Figures 44, 45 and 46. The beaver dam at HIG 3 had a beneficial effect on water temperature. Temperatures were more stable and remained for most of the period in the optimal 10 to 15° C range.
The construction of Dwinnell dam changed the historic hydrograph of the Shasta River. The dam has eliminated freshets that historically would have scoured and replaced spawning gravels, breached beaver dams and assisted fish passage. Smolt emigration is further compounded by reduced flow due to diversions.
Water quality within the ponds may have also been adverse for coho smolt survival. Dense algal blooms were observed in the HIG 3 impoundment on several occasions during the spring of 2009. Potential predators of coho including blue heron, cormorant, kingfisher, common merganser, largemouth bass and otter were also observed. Considering the low sample size and small population, predation may have an influence on both estimated and true survival;
68 especially when low flows and the migratory behavior of coho during the spring may make them more vulnerable. °C 30
25
20
15
10
5 3/15/09 3/22/09 3/29/09 4/5/09 4/12/09 4/19/09 4/26/09 5/3/09 5/10/09 5/17/09 5/24/09 5/31/09 Figure 44. Hourly water temperatures at HIG 4, 3/15/09 through 5/31/09
°C 30
25
20
15
10
5 3/15/09 3/22/09 3/29/09 4/5/09 4/12/09 4/19/09 4/26/09 5/3/09 5/10/09 5/17/09 5/24/09 5/31/09 Figure 45. Hourly water temperatures at HIG 3, 3/15/09 through 5/31/09
°C 30
25
20
15
10
5 3/15/09 3/22/09 3/29/09 4/5/09 4/12/09 4/19/09 4/26/09 5/3/09 5/10/09 5/17/09 5/24/09 5/31/09 Figure 46. Hourly water temperatures at HIG 2, 3/15/09 through 5/31/09
69 Photo 20, HIG 5 Impoundment, 4/21/2009
Photo 21, HIG 3 Impoundment, 4/21/2009
Big Springs Outfall (BSOF) Tagged Coho Coho moved into the pool at the outfall of Big Springs Lake in mid May 2008 (Jeffres, 2009). Individuals tagged at the Nelson Ranch (RM 32) were detected among these fish. The number of tagged individuals detected at the outfall declined rapidly in December of 2008. A portion of these were encountered at upstream as well as downstream locations in the fall and winter of 2008.
Kettle Springs Tagged Coho Though the number of individuals tagged and their detection histories are sparse, PIT tag detection data at Kettle Springs suggests that coho migrated to the area in summer of 2008 and redistributed to and from the area in fall and winter.
RM 35.2 and Big Springs Creek RM 1.5 Tagged Coho A portion of the coho tagged in the HIG 2 (RM 35.2) area exhibited a fall/winter redistribution behavior, unlike tagged coho upstream of the beaver dam at HIG 3 (RM 36). Coho tagged at Big
70 Springs RM 1.5 were also detected at other locations shortly after tagging, again demonstrating a fall/winter redistribution.
6.0 Summary
As water temperatures warmed in May of 2008, we saw 0+ coho migrate upstream to sites cooled by spring inflow. Coho remained at these locations until temperatures cooled in the fall or until they emigrated as smolts. With this life history tactic, Shasta River coho are well adapted to the hot summers typical in eastern part of the ESU. Due to the cold springs, there is great potential for improving and increasing the amount of rearing habitat and coho production in the Big Springs Complex.
Based on the number of adults returning in 2008 and 2009, the observed juvenile production in 2008 and the projected smolt to adult survival, we expect that Cohorts A and C will continue to decline and are functionally extinct (Table 17). Cohort B is the last remaining cohort with viable numbers of adults projected to return. We estimate that 5,000, 1+ coho emigrated from the Shasta River in 2009. If smolt to adult survival is average at 2.9%, we expect that 148 adults will return in the fall of 2010.
Table 17. Status of Shasta River coho cohorts Cohort/ Brood Number of Returning Number of known Juveniles observed at Year Adults redds in Big Spring summer rearing habitat complex Cohort C 31 2 14 BY 2008 Cohort A As of 12/16/09; 9males 0 NA BY 2009 Cohort B 148 projected for 2010 NA NA BY 2010
While the present trend for all cohorts is downward, between 2001 and 2004 there was a 28% increase in the size of Cohort B (Table 2). This occurred due to an increase in the number of smolts produced per adult and higher than average smolt to adult survival. Factors limiting smolt production and survival in the natal stream have been discussed in this report. These factors can be effectively addressed through established stream restoration techniques and alternative land use practices.
Over-summer cold water rearing habitat is essential to smolt survival. Critical rearing habitat on the Shasta Big Springs Ranch is currently undergoing restoration. Efforts by the TNC are producing rapid improvements in water temperature and stream conditions. In the summer of 2008, over 70% of the juvenile coho observed rearing in the Shasta River were found on EII properties (Chesney, 8/2008 power point). During the summer of 2009, EII properties were the only known location in the Shasta River where coho reared (Kettle Springs field note 2009). Restoration efforts similar to TNC’s are needed quickly on EII properties to prepare for the return of BY 2010.
71 As of December 2009, we have identified habitat conditions and land use practices in the Big Springs Complex that if left unchanged will likely reduce the production and survival of juvenile coho from BY 2010. These include:
1. Limited access for adults to spawning habitat due to low streamflow and barriers to upstream migration (October 15th through December 15th).
2. Destruction of redds by cattle in the channel and riparian areas.
3. Limited access for juveniles migrating to summer rearing habitat due to reduced flows and elevated water temperatures caused by the diversion of spring water and tailwater returning to the stream (March 1 through June 30th).
4. Reduced habitat at cold water refugial areas during the summer due to diversion of spring water and warm tailwater returning to the stream (March 1 through September 30th).
5. Warming of cold water refugial areas by the release of warm water from Lake Shastina (May 1 through September 15th).
6. Reduced survival of emigrating smolts due to low flows and increased water temperatures due to diversions and tailwater returning to the stream (March 15th through May 31st).
7.0 Recommendations Due to the large amount of privately owned land in the Shasta Valley, it is essential that land owners and resource management agencies and organizations work together to implement solutions such as those outlined in Table 18.
72 Table 18. Observed concerns, life stage affected, location and example solutions for maximizing salmon production and survival in the upper Shasta Watershed on the Hole in the Ground and Shasta Springs Ranches
Life stage
Concern impacted Location observed Dates Example solutions
1 Redds and egg viability impacted Spawning and Parks Cr., Shasta Springs Ranch • Exclude livestock from stream 10/15 - 4/30 by livestock in the channel incubation Shasta River, Hole in the Ground Ranch
2 Poor adult fish passage due to • Modify downed willows in stream for Spawning Shasta River, Hole in the Ground Ranch 10/15 – 12/15 instream barriers improved access
3 Poor adult fish passage due to low Shasta River, Hole in the Ground Ranch • Release / bypass water from upstream Spawning 10/15 – 12/15 flows sources
Elevated water temperatures and Shasta River, Hole in the Ground Ranch • Improve efficiency of applied irrigation 4 fine sediment due to tailwater Rearing Parks Cr., Shasta Springs Ranch 3/1- 9/30 water to reduce tailwater return to the stream Kettle Springs Creek, Shasta Springs Ranch • Tailwater capture/reuse • Minimize use of cold spring water for 5 Reduced rearing habitat due to low irrigation Shasta River, Hole in the Ground Kettle flows resulting from diversion of Rearing 3/1 – 9/30 • Keep adequate water quantity and quality Springs Creek, Shasta Springs Ranch cold spring water instream to maintain fish in good condition Access to cold water refugia • Improve fish passage where needed Shasta River, Hole in the Ground Ranch 6 limited by diversion structures, Juvenile • Maintain sufficient water quality and Kettle Springs Creek, Shasta Springs Ranch 3/1 – 6/30 instream barriers and low flows migration quantity to provide access to rearing Bridge Field Springs, Shasta Springs Ranch due to diversions areas Reduced smolt survival during 7 emigration due to low flow and • Maintain sufficient flows and suitable Smolt high water temperatures resulting Shasta River, Hole in the Ground Ranch 3/1 – 6/30 temperatures to allow fish passage out of emigration from diversion and tailwater rearing habitat return
73 Monitoring Recommendations
Continue to work with landowners to implement monitoring tasks identified below in 2010/2011/2012
• Spring- Summer 2010; Using the water temperature and coho distribution information collected in 2008 and 2009 as a guideline (Section 5.3), we recommend that water management strategies be developed and tested to conserve cold water at critical over summer rearing habitat and increase rearing areas with suitable water temperatures for coho.
• Fall 2010 Determine the location of spawning in fall 2010 by completing comprehensive spawning ground surveys
• Spring / Summer 2011 Implement practices developed in 2010 to conserve cold water rearing habitat in the spring and summer of 2011
• Monitor distribution of rearing and conditions of habitat in the spring and summer of 2011
• Apply PIT tags and deploy antenna network to monitor migration and estimate the probability of survival of rearing parr
• Spring 2011 Monitor habitat conditions during spring emigration and maintain antenna arrays to develop estimates of the probability of smolt survival.
• Estimate the total smolt production for BY 2010 using the rotary trap at RM .3
74 8.0 Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the following individuals, agencies and organizations for their help with this project. This project was funded in part by the Bureau of Reclamation, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Access to the river was granted by The Nature Conservancy, Irene Busk, Emmerson Investments Incorporated, Don Meamber, and Dave Webb. Additional support was provided by the board members and staff of the Shasta Valley Resource Conservation District, California Trout, California Department of Fish and Game’s Klamath River Project, the Fisheries staff of the Karuk Tribe and the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission. Kerry Mauro provided technical direction and assistance for remote detection systems. Eric Janney, David Hewitt, Brian Hayes, Alta Scott and other USGS staff at the Klamath Falls Field Station contributed a database and analytical support. We also thank the following people for their assistance: Carson Jeffres, Mark Pisano, Mark Hampton, Jim Whelan, Mary Olswang, Seth Daniels, Kirsten Barbarick, Tara Blackman, Denton Lopez, Diana Chesney, Michael Dean, Morgan Knechtle, Mike Deas, Torrey Tyler, Pete Adams, George Stroud, Ada Fowler, Chris Babcock, Stan Allen, Julie Kelley, Pete Scala, and Stan Krute.
75 9.0 Literature Cited
Adams C. C. 2009. Remote PIT tag detection system manual DRAFT 3: Shasta River PIT tag study. 9 p. (unpublished report)
Bell, M. C. 1973. Fisheries handbook of engineering requirements and biological criteria. Fisheries Engineering Research Program. U.S. Army Corps. Engineering Division. Portland, OR.
Buckland, S. T., K. P. Burnham and N. H. Agustin. 1997. Model selection: an integral part of inference. Biometrics 53:603–618.
Burnham, K. P. and D. R. Anderson. 2002. Model Selection and Inference: A Practical Information-Theoretical Approach. Springer-Verlag, New York.
Bovee, K. D. and R. Milhous. 1978. Hydraulic simulation in instream flow studies: Theory and techniques. Instream Flow Information Paper: No. 5: Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-78/33. 156 p.
Chesney, D. 2009. Shasta River Fish Counting Facility, Chinook and Coho Salmon Observations in 2008-2009 Siskiyou County, CA
Chesney, W. R. and E. M. Yokel. 2003. Shasta and Scott River juvenile salmonid outmigrant study, 2002. CDFG Annual Report, Project 2a1. Yreka, CA. 39 p.
_____. 2008. Powerpoint presentation. CDFG, Yreka Office.
_____. 2009. Kettle Springs Field Note. CDFG, Yreka Office.
_____, W. B. Crombie and H. D. Langendorf. 2009. Shasta and Scott River Juvenile Salmonid Outmigration Monitoring Project, 2008. CDFG Annual Report. Yreka, CA. 60 p.
Cooch, E. and G. C. White. 2006. Program MARK: a gentle introduction, 5th edition. Ithaca Cornell University, New York.
Griffiths, J. S. and D. F. Alderice. 1972. Effects of acclimation and acute temperature experience on the swimming speed of juvenile coho salmon. Journal of Fisheries Research Board of Canada. 29:251-264.
Jeffres, C. A., E. M. Buckland, M. L. Deas, B. G. Hammock, J. D. Kiernan, A. M. King, N. Y. Krigbaum, J. F. Mount, P. B Moyle, D. L. Nichols, and S. E. Null. 2008. Baseline assessment of Salmonid Habitat and Aquatic Ecology of the Nelson Ranch, Shasta River, California Water Year 2007. Report prepared for: United States Bureau of Reclamation, Klamath Area Office.
76 Kirkby, K. 2009. Summary of 2008 and 2009 Fyke Net and Rotary Screw Trap Operations on Nelson Ranch, Shasta River Valley, California.
Littleton, B. and M. Pisano. 2006. Shasta River coho radio telemetry investigation, 2004.
Madej, M. A., C. Currens, V. Ozaki, J. Yee and D. G. Anderson. 2006. Assessing possible thermal rearing restrictions for juvenile coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) through thermal infrared imaging and in-stream monitoring, Redwood Creek, California. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. 63: 1384-1396.
Mount, J., P. Moyle and M. Deas. 2009. Baseline assessment of physical and biological conditions within waterways on Big Springs Ranch, Siskiyou County, California. Report prepared for: California State Water Resources Control Board.
Olswang, M. 2007. Shasta River Field Note. CDFG, Yreka Office.
Olswang, M., B. Littleton and M. Pisano. 2008. Shasta River coho salmon radio telemetry investigation summary, 2007. 6 p.
PIT Tag Steering Committee. 1999. PIT tag marking procedures manual, version 2.0. Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority, Portland, Oregon.
Schwarz, C. J. and G. A. F. Seber. 1999. Estimating animal abundance: review III. Statistical Science 14:427–456.
Skinner, J. E. 1959. Preliminary report of the fish and wildlife in relation to plans for water development in Shasta Valley. California Department of Water Resources; Shasta Valley Investigation, Bulletin No. 87, Appendix B. 50 p.
Wales, J. H. 1952. The decline of the Shasta River king salmon run. Bureau of Fish Conservation Division of California Department of Fish and Game Report. 82 p.
Watershed Sciences. 2004. Aerial surveys using thermal infrared and color videography, Scott River and Shasta River Sub-Basins. Report to: North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board.
Welsh, Jr. H. H., G. R. Hodgson, B. C. Harvey and M. E. Roche. 2001. Distribution of juvenile coho salmon in relation to water temperatures in tributaries of the Mattole River, California. North American Journal of Fisheries Management. 21: 464-470.
White, G. C. and K. P. Burnham. 1999. Program MARK: survival rate estimation from both live and dead encounters. Bird Study 46(Supplement):S120–S139.
77 10.0 Appendices
Appendix 1
Monitoring sites on the Shasta River in Siskiyou County, California during the summer of 2008
Location GPS Coordinates Monitoring Method (Y=YES, N=NO) Site Name River Mile Latitude Longitude Flow Transect Dive Count Temperature Logger SBS 1 32.9 041°35'41.76"N 122°26'42.15"W N Y Y SBS 2 33.3 041°35'39.56"N 122°26'37.90"W N Y Y SBS 3 33.4 041°35'36.10"N 122°26'34.69"W N Y N SBS 4 33.6 041°35'39.38"N 122°26'22.14"W N Y Y *BSC ----- 041°35'36.80"N 122°26'13.52"W N N Y SBS 5 33.7 041°35'35.37"N 122°26'15.36"W N N Y SBS 6 34.9 041°34'53.82"N 122°25'45.18"W N N Y **PC ----- 041°34’50.53”N 122°25'44.11”W N N Y HIG 1 35.0 041°34'47.00"N 122°25'41.00"W Y Y Y HIG 2 35.2 041°34'42.77"N 122°25'37.50"W Y Y Y HIG 3 36.0 041°34'9.27"N 122°25'31.63"W Y Y Y HIG 4 36.3 041°33'54.93"N 122°25'30.52"W Y Y Y HIG 5 36.8 041°33'46.70"N 122°25'8.47"W Y Y Y Clear Springs 37.0 041°33'43.41"N 122°24'56.09"W N N Y Fence Line 37.4 041°33'46.10"N 122°24'29.79"W N N Y † Kettle Springs ----- 041°32'58.14"N 122°25'38.58"W Y Y Y *BSC is located at the mouth of Big Springs Creek, a tributary to the Shasta River. ** PC is located at the upstream boundary of Parks Creek on the Busk Ranch. Parks Creek is a tributary to the Shasta River. † Kettle Springs is the headwaters of Kettle Springs Creek, which empties into Parks Creek.
78 Appendix 2 Fyke Net Specifications
3’X4’ FYKE NET SPECIFICATIONS:
Frame: 36”H x 48”W. 2 frames made of 1/2” diameter welded conduit. Netting: 3/16”square (3/8” stretch) #105 knotless nylon netting. Hoops: Constructed of ¼” spring steel, 5 hoops. The first is 36” diameter with each succeeding hoop measuring approximately 1” smaller. Lead: 3’H x 20’L attached to the center of the front frame. Netting is 3/16” square #105 knotless nylon stitched to a ¼” rope with SB-2 floats spaced every 4’ on top and #50 pound lead line on bottom. A zipper is sewn to the lead for attachment to the center bar of the front frame of the trap. Wings: Two wings, each 3’x15’. They will also have zippers for attachment to the sides of the front frame of the trap. Winkers: Each net has two side winkers and one center winker, with 3” vertical slit openings. Throats: Two throats, first attached to the first hoop tied to the third hoop with 1/8” diameter rope. The second, attached to the third hoop tied to the fifth hoop. Throats have a 4-5” opening. Cod End: A 1/8” braided nylon rope is run through netting as a draw string to close the cod end. Twine: Number 15 twine is used throughout the net. Tie Spacing: Tie spacing on the hoops and frames is no further than 3” apart. Tie spacing on the leads is further than 8” apart. Treatment: Nets and leads are treated with water-based black UV inhibitor net treatment.
2’X3’ FYKE NET SPECIFICATIONS
Same as above except frame in 24”Hx36”W, 4 hoops, the first 24“diameter, 2’Hx15’L lead, and 2’Hx10‘L wings.
Appendix 3. Rearing capture methods
Minnow Trap Minnow traps were cylindrical in shape, 18” in length, 8” in circumference, and had an inverted cone on each end where fish could easily enter. Each trap was baited with cured salmon roe and either placed on the stream bottom or hung from a line attached to overhanging vegetation so that is set suspended in the water column. Each trap was fished for approximately 24 hours.
79 Seine Net Seine nets were approximately 15’long by 4’ high with a ¼” delta mesh pattern and had a float and lead line attached. Divers used these seine nets to capture coho salmon by encircling them with the seine and lifting the float and lead line simultaneously.
Fyke Net Two different sized fyke nets were used during the study, one with an opening of 2’x 3’ and one with an opening of 3’x 4’. A description of each fyke net is provided in Appendix 2. Fyke nets were always positioned on the stream bottom and the traps were often set completely submerged, with the lead line and one or two of the wings positioned to transect areas where snorkel divers had confirmed the presence of coho. These traps were fished for approximately 24 hours.
Hand Net Hand nets were teardrop shaped with transparent netting attached to an opening that was 15”x 18” (Aquatic Ecosystems #TFN 101). Snorkel divers were successful in capturing juvenile coho salmon by using one of the following techniques. Once coho were found, divers would slowly approach and carefully lay the net on the stream bottom with an outstretched arm. Divers would then remain motionless until one or more juvenile coho salmon would position themselves over the net at which time the diver would quickly lift the net straight up out of the water, hopefully resulting in a capture. A second technique involved using one hand to position the net perpendicular to the stream bottom just downstream of holding fish. The other arm was then used to slowly encroach on the target fish from upstream causing it to turn and retreat into the awaiting net.
80 Appendix 4: Table of Summer 2008 maximum temperatures per week per site MAX TEMP/WEEK/SITE JW KS FENCE CS HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1 PC SBS 6 SBS 5 BSO BSC SBS 4 SBS 2 SBS 1 13 13.738 13.906 14.385 12.63 17.034 16.82 14 17.034 17.153 17.748 13.161 18.652 18.699 15 19.888 19.984 21.008 13.858 20.507 20.889 16 17.724 18.699 20.555 13.329 20.913 21.079 17 21.342 20.698 20.627 14.074 22.298 21.581 21.461 18 20.484 20.579 21.008 15.652 22.92 22.896 22.13 19 20.007 20.007 21.079 15.461 21.891 21.939 21.413 20 23.545 23.809 24.968 24.895 25.866 16.606 25.137 24.726 24.605 21 16.8 16.463 16.272 17.677 17.986 18.176 18.224 18.723 14.481 20.198 20.079 19.08 22 23.761 19.05 18.723 20.793 20.198 25.186 23.04 22.753 23.328 15.175 22.848 22.92 22.657 23 23.954 13.642 19.37 19.341 19.389 21.032 21.079 23.064 22.202 22.082 15.151 21.413 21.628 20.126 24 25.355 13.666 20.5 19.912 19.936 21.915 22.274 24.702 23.424 23.304 15.963 23.424 23.641 23.761 21.032 25 25.283 13.69 19.37 19.627 20.246 21.939 24.919 24.291 19.199 23.136 16.701 23.208 23.617 23.472 20.627 26 26.891 13.69 19.53 20.817 21.795 25.404 25.501 24.363 17.772 24.219 17.605 23.689 24.026 24.219 20.793 27 27.407 13.666 21.16 21.032 21.987 22.513 23.4 18.794 21.461 23.569 18.414 23.088 23.28 23.593 20.579 28 28.345 13.666 21.16 21.724 24.412 21.7 23.04 28.742 22.92 24.05 17.153 23.521 23.545 24.026 20.913 29 26.744 13.69 20.02 20.984 21.485 19.46 27.456 27.53 22.537 23.617 16.606 21.772 21.939 22.657 19.674 30 24.992 13.69 18.24 20.746 20.96 20.65 20.841 26.304 22.345 23.328 16.272 21.103 21.27 21.987 19.032 31 25.72 13.618 19.05 20.317 20.579 20.484 20.603 26.231 20.722 21.939 16.582 21.008 21.246 21.772 19.008 32 14.553 25.574 13.594 18.866 20.555 20.936 20.126 20.436 25.453 20.913 22.13 16.939 20.96 21.581 21.915 19.032 33 14.581 28.419 13.594 20.555 21.724 21.819 21.509 21.294 24.871 23.04 23.088 17.938 21.103 21.246 22.393 18.889
81 Appendix 5: Summer 2008 maximum temperatures per week
°C JW 20 HIG Maximum Temperatures °C JW 21 HIG Maximum Temperatures 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10 Fenc e CS HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1 Fenc e CS HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1 Site Site
°C JW 22 HIG Maximum Temperatures °C JW 23 HIG Maximum Temperatures 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10 Fenc e CS HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1 Fenc e CS HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1 Site Site
°C JW 24 HIG Maximum Temperatures °C JW 25 HIG Maximum Temperatures 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10 Fenc e CS HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1 Fenc e CS HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1 Site Site
°C JW 26 HIG Maximum Temperatures °C JW 27 HIG Maximum Temperatures 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10 Fenc e CS HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1 Fenc e CS HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1 Site Site
82 Appendix 5 (cont.): Summer 2008 maximum temperatures per week
°C JW 28 HIG Maximum Temperatures °C JW 29 HIG Maximum Temperatures 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10 Fenc e CS HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1 Fenc e CS HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1 Site Site
°C JW 30 HIG Maximum Temperatures °C JW 31 HIG Maximum Temperatures 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10 Fenc e CS HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1 Fenc e CS HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1 Site Site
°C JW 32 HIG Maximum Temperatures °C JW 33 HIG Maximum Temperatures 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10 Fenc e CS HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1 Fenc e CS HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1 Site Site
83 Appendix 6: Hourly temperature variability per month at temperature monitoring sites 2008. °C HIG fence Line °C HIG Kettle Springs Hourly water temperature variability for May Hourly water temperature variability for August 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour Hour
°C HIG fence Line °C HIG Clear Spring Hourly water temperature variability for June Hourly water temperature variability for June 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour Hour
°C HIG Fence Line °C HIG Clear Spring Hourly water temperature variability for July Hourly water temperature variability forJuly 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour Hour
°C HIG Fence Line °C HIG Clear Spring Hourly water temperature variability for August Hourly water temperature variability for August 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour Hour 84 Appendix 6 (cont.): Hourly temperature variability per month at temperature monitoring sites 2008. °C HIG 5 °C HIG 4 Hourly water temperature variability for May Hourly water temperature variability for May 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour Hour
°C HIG 5 °C HIG 4 Hourly water temperature variability for June Hourly water temperature variability for June 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour Hour
°C HIG 5 °C HIG 4 Hourly water temperature variability for July Hourly water temperature variability for July 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour Hour
°C HIG 5 °C HIG 4 Hourly water temperature variability for August Hourly water temperature variability for August 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour Hour 85 Appendix 6 (cont.): Hourly temperature variability per month at temperature monitoring sites 2008. °C HIG 3 °C HIG 2 Hourly water temperature variability for May Hourly water temperature variability for May 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour Hour
°C HIG 3 °C HIG 2 Hourly water temperature variability for June Hourly water temperature variability for June 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour Hour
°C HIG 3 °C Hig 2 Hourly water temperature variability for July Hourly water temperature variability for July 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour Hour
°C HIG 3 °C HIG 2 Hourly water temperature variability for August Hourly water temperature variability for August 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour Hour 86 Appendix 6 (cont.): Hourly temperature variability per month at temperature monitoring sites 2008. °C Parks Creek Hourly water temperature variability for April 30
25
20
15
10
5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour °C HIG 1 Parks Creek Hourly water temperature variability for May °C Hourly water temperature variability for May 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718192021222324 Hour Hour °C HIG 1 Parks Creek °C Hourly water temperature variability for June Hourly water temperature variability for June 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718192021222324 Hour Hour °C HIG 1 °C Parks Creek Hourly water temperature variability for July Hourly water temperature variability for July 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour Hour 87 Appendix 6 (cont.): Hourly temperature variability per month at temperature monitoring sites 2008.
°C HIG 1 °C Parks Creek Hourly water temperature variability for August Hourly water temperature variability for August 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 123456789101112131415161718192021222324 Hour Hour °C SBS 6 °C SBS 5 Hourly water temperature variability for April Hourly water temperature variability for April 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour Hour °C SBS 6 °C SBS 5 Hourly water temperature variability for May Hourly water temperature variability for May 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour Hour °C SBS 6 °C SBS 5 Hourly water temperature variability for June Hourly water temperature variability for June 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour Hour 88 Appendix 6 (cont.): Hourly temperature variability per month at temperature monitoring sites 2008. °C SBS 6 °C SBS 5 Hourly water temperature variability for July Hourly water temperature variability for July 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour Hour °C SBS 6 °C SBS 5 Hourly water temperature variability for August Hourly water temperature variability for August 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour Hour °C Big Springs Outfall °C Big Springs Creek Hourly water temperature variability for April Hourly water temperature variability for April 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour Hour °C Big Springs Outfall °C Big Springs Creek Hourly water temperature variability for May Hourly water temperature variability for May 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour Hour 89 Appendix 6 (cont.): Hourly temperature variability per month at temperature monitoring sites 2008. °C Big Springs Outfall °C Big Springs Creek Hourly water temperature variability for June Hourly water temperature variability for June 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour Hour °C Big Springs Outfall °C Big Springs Creek Hourly water temperature variability for July Hourly water temperature variability for July 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour Hour °C Big Springs Outfall °C Big Springs Creek Hourly water temperature variability for August Hourly water temperature variability for August 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour Hour °C SBS 4 Hourly water temperature variability for April 30
25
20
15
10
5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour 90 Appendix 6 (cont.): Hourly temperature variability per month at temperature monitoring sites 2008. °C SBS 4 Hourly water temperature variability for May 30
25
20
15
10
5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour °C SBS 4 °C SBS 2 Hourly water temperature variability for June Hourly water temperature variability for June 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour Hour °C SBS 4 °C SBS 2 Hourly water temperature variability for July Hourly water temperature variability for July 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour Hour °C SBS 4 °C SBS 2 Hourly water temperature variability for August Hourly water temperature variability for August 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour Hour 91 Appendix 6 (cont.): Hourly temperature variability per month at temperature monitoring sites 2008. °C SBS 1 °C SBS 1 Hourly water temperature variability for April Hourly water temperature variability for May 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour Hour
°C SBS 1 °C SBS 1 Hourly water temperature variability for June Hourly water temperature variability forJuly 30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour Hour
°C SBS 1 Hourly water temperature variability for August 30
25
20
15
10
5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour
92 Appendix 7. Discharge(cfs) measured at five monitoring sites on the Shasta River at Hole in the Ground Ranch in 2008.
HIG 5 HIG 4 HIG 3 HIG 2 HIG 1 13-May ------5.83 27-May ---- 2.76 1.42 4.63 3.73 11-Jun 8.65 2.89 1.66 7.82 5.55 24-Jun ------5.70 6.44 8-Jul 5.77 1.16 1.30 5.64 6.36 21-Jul 9.69 0.99 1.86 6.53 5.87 6-Aug 6.00 2.99 1.75 ------12-Aug 6.12 3.02 ------Mean 7.25 2.30 1.30 6.06 5.63 Min 5.77 0.99 1.30 4.63 3.73 Max 9.69 3.02 1.86 7.82 6.44 n 5 6 5 5 6
93 Appendix 8. Number of salmonids observed per visit from dive counts in the Shasta River at sites on Shasta Big Springs Ranch in 2008.
pr pr ay ay n -A -A -M -M -Ju 10 17-Apr 23 1-May 8-May 15 21-May 22 29-May 5-Jun 12 19-Jun 3-Jul 17-Jul
d d ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok lhead lhea lhead lhea lhead o no o o no no o inook no o o no o no o inook no o no o hi h ee hi ee h hi h ee hi ee h hi ee hi Site coho steelheadC coh steelheadChinookco st C coho steelheadChi coh st C coho steelheadC coh steelheadChinookco st C coh steelheadChi coh st C coho steelheadC coh steelheadChinookcoho st C coh steelheadChin Diver 122045521710026311820020170------010030000000020060 Diver 24408571741041303050200010------020------010030020 Diver 3------5102302------030------080000 SBS 1 Diver 4 ------0 1 0 ------Mean3306562454021412940120140------010030000010040030 stdev1603114150212211320110140------010------010030030 Diver 13012866467306499314001010------7132212091306906401802170 Diver 2300411220380184502------1182------0250------160------0200501280 Diver 3------34006800------1030------1900240 SBS 2 Diver 4 ------9 0 0 ------Mean3013539334808543214001031------4191212051006903301701230 stdev0193814210912521000141------581------650------410120160 Diver 120640200011311900230------060019001200170015001500180 Diver 2 ------0 0 0 ------0 3 0 ------0 8 0 0 14 0 ------0 16 0 0 18 0 Diver 3------1302------0153------070 SBS 3 Diver 4 ------0 4 3 ------Mean20640240111311900112------060014001300170015001600140 stdev------801------0102------080010------010000 Diver 1907644218520212129003900170070------013002300800100050------Diver 2------6021150221411142130------0240------030------Diver 3 ------0 1 0 ------2 14 2 ------0 3 0 ------SBS 4 Diver 4 ------2 0 9 ------Mean907644218190141815112711113150------013002400800100040------stdev------2811242111181184130------010------010------
94 Appendix 9. Number of salmonids observed per visit from dive counts in the Shasta River at sites on the Hole in the Ground Ranch in 2008.
13-May 27-May 11-Jun 24-Jun 8-Jul 21-Jul 6-Aug Site coho steelhead coho steelhead coho steelhead coho steelhead coho steelhead coho steelhead coho steelhead Diver 1 0 45 0 38 0 50 0 20 0 24 0 0 -- -- Diver 2 0 47 0 30 1 58 0 0 0 13 0 1 -- -- Diver 3 0 39 0 29 -- -- 0 30 0 24 0 0 -- -- Mean 0 44 0 32 1 54 0 17 0 20 0 0 -- -- HIG 1 std 0 4.2 0.0 4.9 0.7 5.7 0.0 15.3 0.0 6.4 0.0 0.6 -- -- Diver 1 0 17 1 24 0 9 0 1 0 3 0 5 -- -- Diver 2 0 0 16 5 0 11 0 4 0 5 0 4 -- -- Diver 3 0 15 0 31 -- -- 0 0 0 4 0 0 -- -- Mean 0 11 6 20 0 10 0 2 0 4 0 3 -- -- HIG 2 std 0 9.3 9.0 13.5 0.0 1.4 0.0 2.1 0.0 1.0 0.0 2.6 -- -- Diver 1 -- -- 20 3 23 3 15 3 16 1 13 3 18 4 Diver 2 -- -- 19 1 26 3 0 0 10 1 20 5 12 9 Diver 3 -- -- 19 3 -- -- 5 2 27 0 16 2 19 5 Mean -- -- 19 2 25 3 7 2 18 1 16 3 16 6 HIG 3 std -- -- 0.6 1.2 2.1 0.0 7.6 1.5 8.6 0.6 3.5 1.5 3.8 2.6 Diver 1 -- -- 9 2 6 4 9 7 5 5 9 8 6 11 Diver 2 -- -- 9 1 3 2 9 10 2 10 5 4 3 5 Diver 3 -- -- 7 2 -- -- 12 5 3 6 1 9 5 4 Mean -- -- 8 2 5 3 10 7 3 7 5 7 5 7 HIG 4 std -- -- 1.2 0.6 2.1 1.4 1.7 2.5 1.5 2.6 4.0 2.6 1.5 3.8 Diver 1 ------13 0 17 0 15 0 15 0 19 0 Diver 2 ------26 0 8 2 7 3 5 0 27 0 Diver 3 ------14 0 17 0 12 0 18 2 Mean ------20 0 13 1 13 1 11 0 21 1 HIG 5 stdev ------9.2 0.0 4.6 1.2 5.3 1.7 5.1 0.0 4.9 1.2
95 Appendix 10: Nelson Ranch Salmonid Catches Nelson Ranch RST and fyke salmonid catch by age class 2008, 2009. Mortalities are included in totals and indicated in parentheses.
2008 Salmonid Catch for Nelson Ranch Fykes by Julian Week (JW)
Days Fyke JW Dates Set Days Steelhead Coho Chinook 0+ 1+ 2+ 3+ 0+ 1+ 0+ 9 2/26-3/4 3 3 1 11 1 1 3 10 3/5-3/11 2 2 2 2 6 (1) 5 11 3/12-3-18 1 1 3 4 12 3/19-3/25 2 2 2 3 14 4/2 - 4/8 2 2 1 15 4/9 - 4/15 3 4 3 1 4 9 2 16 4/16 - 4/22 2 6 2 1 6 40 (2) 4 17 4/23 - 4/29 2 6 3 (1) 1 2 54 4 (1) 18 4/30 - 5/6 3 9 6 3 1 1 70 (1) 3 19 5/7 - 5/13 4 12 23 2 94 16 20 5/14 - 5/20 7 21 69 (1) 3 (1) 5 2 676 (8) 1 28 21 5/21 - 5/27 2 6 14 59 2 22 5/28 - 6/3 3 7 5 1 5 23 6/4 - 6/10 5 15 17 2 1 12 1 24 6/11 - 6/17 4 12 14 1 5 25 6/18 - 6/24 5 14 22 4 6 1 26 6/25 - 7/1 2 4 3 1 1 4 27 7/2 - 7/8 1 1 3 2 28 7/9 - 7/15 1 2 2 1 1
186 16 1049 Totals 54 129 (2) (1) 40 5 (12) 2 76 (1) 247 (3) 1051 (12) 76 (1)
96 Appendix 10 (cont): Nelson Ranch Salmonid Catches
2008 Salmonid Catch for Nelson Ranch RST by Julian Week (JW)
Days JW Dates Set Steelhead Coho Chinook 0+ 1+ 2+ 3+ 0+ 1+ 0+ 1+ 2 1/8 - 1/14 1 3 1/15 - 1/21 3 1 46 (1) 4 1/22 - 1/28 4 1 61 5 1/29 - 2/4 2 1 23 7 2/12 - 2/18 3 63 (1) 8 2/19 - 2/25 3 1 1 1 21 2 9 2/26 - 3/4 3 2 (1) 14 84 10 3/5 - 3/11 3 1 1 22 61 (1) 11 3/12 - 3/18 2 1 1 1 7 29 (1) 12 3/19 - 3/25 5 27 1 1 37 92 13 3/26 - 4/1 3 8 8 15 14 4/2 - 4/8 4 18 2 2 11 80 15 4/9 - 4/15 5 23 2 2 5 197 (2) 16 4/16 - 4/22 4 33 5 2 11 107 17 4/23 - 4/29 5 45 4 5 22 18 4/30 - 5/6 4 84 1 1 20 19 5/7 - 5/13 4 185 (5) 10 21 20 5/14 - 5/20 7 375 3 1 116 (1) 3 46 21 5/21 - 5/27 4 350 (1) 1 1 9 1 22 5/28 - 6/3 5 178 (3) 4 23 6/4 - 6/10 5 360 (4) 6 1 1 24 6/11 - 6/17 4 347 1 4 1 25 6/18 - 6/24 4 123 2 26 6/25 - 7/1 4 79 1 27 7/2 - 7/8 1 24 1 28 7/9 - 7/15 1 12
2272 26 Totals 93 (13) (1) 11 2 274 (1) 5 992 (6) 2 2311 (14) 279 (1) 994 (2)
97 Appendix 10 (cont): Nelson Ranch Salmonid Catches
2009 Salmonid Catch for Nelson Ranch Fykes by Julian Week (JW)
Days Fyke JW Dates Set Days Steelhead Coho Chinook 0+ 1+ 2+ 3+ 1+ 0+ 8 2/19 - 2/25 1 2 1 1 1 13 3/26 - 4/1 2 6 3 10 2 5 6 14 4/2 - 4/8 1 3 4 1 15 4/9 - 4/15 2 6 2 2 1 3 16 4/16 - 4/22 3 9 4 2 10 1 1 4 17 4/23 - 4/29 2 6 3 1 4 2 1 18 4/30 - 5/6 1 3 5 1 3 1 19 5/7 - 5/13 4 12 20 5 1 20 5/14 - 5/20 3 7 33 (1) 1(1) 1 1 (1) 21 5/21 - 5/27 3 8 30 5 1 4 3 22 5/28 - 6/3 2 6 20 1 2 23 6/4 - 6/10 2 2 19 (2) 4 1 24 6/11 - 6/17 2 2 8 (1) 3 1 4 25 6/18 - 6/24 3 3 11 3 1 26 6/25 - 7/1 2 2 8 1 1 1 27 7/2 - 7/8 2 2 4 3 2 1 28 7/9 - 7/15 2 2 10 5 1 29 7/16 - 7/22 2 2 7 5
184 23 Totals 39 83 (4) (1) 59 22 9 19 (1) 288 (5) 9 19 (1)
98 Appendix 10 (cont): Nelson Ranch Salmonid Catches
2009 Salmonid Catch for Nelson Ranch RST by Julian Week
JW Dates Days Set Steelhead Coho Chinook 0+ 1+ 2+ 3+ 1+ 0+ 1+ 8 2/19 - 2/25 1 2 30 1 13 3/26 - 4/1 2 3 3 75 (1) 14 4/2 - 4/8 3 15 4 1 61 15 4/9 - 4/15 2 2 3 21 16 4/16 - 4/22 3 53 4 7 1 1 119 17 4/23 - 4/29 1 45 7 18 4/30 - 5/6 2 55 8 8 19 5/7 - 5/13 3 80 (1) 1 2 58 (1) 20 5/14 - 5/20 3 107 (1) 1 1 1 42 21 5/21 - 5/27 3 237 (4) 19 22 5/28 - 6/3 2 98 23 6/4 - 6/10 3 93 1 2 24 6/11 - 6/17 3 197 (1) 25 6/18 - 6/24 3 90 (1) 26 6/25 - 7/1 2 30 27 7/2 - 7/8 1 6 28 7/9 - 7/15 2 31 1 29 7/16 - 7/22 1 6
1148 (8) 7 20 1 13 443 (2) 1 Totals 40 1176 (8) 13 444 (2)
99 Appendix 11: Quality Control Results of tagged fish held overnight for evaluation of tagging mortality and tag loss at Nelson Ranch (RM32) in the spring and early summer of 2008. Tagged Coho Held 24 Hours Date Held Mortality Shed Tag Location 4/17/08 1 0 0 RST 4/28/08 1 1 0 RST 5/16/08 12 0 0 RST 5/18/08 14 0 0 RST 5/19/08 13 0 0 RST 5/20/08 6 0 0 RST 5/20/08 6 0 0 Fykes 5/21/08 8 0 0 Fykes 5/21/08 4 0 0 RST 5/22/08 1 0 0 RST 5/29/08 1 0 0 RST 6/2/08 2 0 0 RST 6/4/08 1 0 0 RST 6/5/08 3 0 0 RST 6/6/08 2 0 0 RST 6/10/08 1 0 0 RST 6/11/08 1 0 0 RST 6/12/08 1 0 0 RST 6/13/08 1 0 0 RST 6/17/08 1 0 0 RST 6/17/08 3 0 0 Fykes 6/20/08 1 0 0 RST Total 84 1 0
100 Appendix 12: Antenna system locations and dates of operation.
Antenna System Operation Dates Location Description Installation Date Removal Date Shasta Rivers confluence with the RM 0 Klamath River 2/28/08 NA RM 15 Meamber Ranch 5/3/08 NA RM 26 Lower Nelson Ranch 4/11/08 10/5/2008 Upper Nelson Ranch RM 32 downstream of RST 4/6/08 NA Upper Nelson Ranch RM 32.1 upstream fyke nets 9/24/08 2/16/2009 RM 32.9 SBS dive site 1 4/17/08 7/3/2008 100 yards downstream of HIG RM 35 dive site 1 9/24/08 NA RM 36 HIG dive site 3 6/3/08 6/9/2009 100 yards downstream of HIG RM 36.8 dive site 5 7/1/08 NA Big Springs Creek RM Water wheel 2.6 structure 8/7/08 11/20/2008 Big Springs Outfall Big Springs outfall 8/7/08 NA Parks Creek 100 yards upstream from Parks Creek confluence with the RM 0 Shasta River 10/29/08 NA Parks Creek RM 4 Dukes Ranch 2/27/09 NA Kettle Springs Kettle Springs outfall 8/6/08 NA
101 Appendix 13. Nelson Ranch tagged coho upstream detections. Detection histories of BY2007 coho tagged at Nelson Ranch (RM32) in the spring and early summer of 2008 that were later encountered at upstream locations. Individuals are arranged by detection history category and then tagging date with those individuals included in more than one category displayed at the end. Each individual is presented with tagging information on the fist line, including PIT tag number, date and FL at tagging followed by a chronological list of encounters. The first and last encounter at each location is displayed, if greater than one week apart.
Detection Histories of Nelson Ranch (RM 32) Spring/Summer 2008 Tagged BY2007 Coho Later Encountered Upstream PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985161001010158 RM 32 4/29/08 62 RM 36 6/8/08 RM 0 4/16/09
985161001019021 RM 32 5/2/08 67 RM 36.8 9/26/08 RM 36.8 4/10/09 RM 36 4/21/09 RM 35 Down 4/22/09
985161000039518 RM 32 5/3/08 57 RM 36.8 4/19/09
985161000029814 RM 32 5/8/08 60 RM 36 6/1/08
985121003614157 RM 32 5/13/08 60 RM 36.8 12/21/08 RM 36.8 4/8/09
985161001305531 RM 32 5/16/08 62 RM 36 6/3/08 RM 36.8 4/16/09
985161000040928 RM 32 5/16/08 66 RM 36 6/3/08
985161000967825 RM 32 5/16/08 60 RM 36 6/1/08 RM 36.8 6/14/08
985121003014496 RM 32 5/17/08 60 RM 36 6/5/08
102
Appendix 13 (cont): Nelson Ranch tagged coho upstream detections. PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985121003671384 RM 32 5/17/08 57 RM 36 6/7/08 RM 36.8 1/1/09 RM 36.8 2/14/09
985121003610197 RM 32 5/18/08 57 RM 36 6/13/08
985121003610721 RM 32 5/18/08 64 RM 36 5/30/08 RM 36.8 4/21/09 RM 36 4/22/09 RM 35 Down 4/22/09
985161001298321 RM 32 5/20/08 62 RM 36 6/24/08 RM 36.8 6/26/08
985121003610895 RM 32 5/21/08 62 RM 36 5/28/08 RM 36.8 4/7/09 RM 36 4/17/09
985121003621512 RM 32 5/22/08 76 RM 36 6/19/08 RM 36 4/22/09 RM 35 down 5/1/09
985121003669538 RM 32 6/4/08 85 RM 36 6/15/08 RM 36 4/15/09 RM 35 Down 4/16/09 RM 0 4/19/09
985161001298907 RM 32 6/6/08 87 RM 36 6/9/08 RM 36.8 2/26/09 RM 36.8 4/20/09 RM 36 4/21/09 RM 35 Down 5/3/09 RM 0 5/6/09
103 Appendix 13 (cont): Nelson Ranch tagged coho upstream detections.
PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985161000041444 RM 32 5/16/08 59 Parks RM 0 Down 4/11/09 RM 0 4/14/09
985121003611405 RM 32 5/18/08 66 Parks RM 0 Down 3/18/09 RM 0 4/21/09
985121003681207 RM 32 5/18/08 59 Parks RM 0 4/12/09 RM 0 4/17/09
985121003666742 RM 32 5/18/08 62 Parks RM 0 Down 3/13/09 RM 0 3/22/09
985121003617070 RM 32 5/22/08 64 Parks RM 0 Down 4/21/09 RM 0 4/25/09
985121003667410 RM 32 6/19/08 69 Parks RM 0 3/31/09 RM 0 4/8/09
985161001023413 RM 32 4/29/08 59 Parks RM 4 Down 4/19/09 Parks RM 0 4/20/09 RM 0 4/23/09
985121003015444 RM 32 5/17/08 59 Parks RM 4 3/28/09 Parks RM 0 3/29/09 RM 0 4/10/09
985121003670705 RM 32 5/19/08 59 Parks RM 4 Down 4/7/09 Parks RM 0 Down 4/13/09 RM 0 4/16/09
104
Appendix 13 (cont): Nelson Ranch tagged coho upstream detections.
PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985121003617899 RM 32 5/21/08 56 Parks RM 4 4/9/09 Parks RM 0 4/11/09
985121003671350 RM 32 5/17/08 62 Big Spring Outfall 8/22/08
985121003619167 RM 32 5/18/08 59 Big Spring Outfall 8/12/08 Big Spring Outfall 8/25/08 RM 0 4/13/09
985161000040924 RM 32 5/20/08 63 Big Spring Outfall 8/29/08 Big Spring Outfall 2/19/09
985121003611602 RM 32 5/13/08 60 Parks RM 0 Up 2/1/09 Parks RM 4 3/9/09 Parks RM 0 Down 3/13/09
985161000978676 RM 32 5/16/08 56 Parks RM 0 2/1/09 RM 0 4/16/09
985161000967417 RM 32 5/20/08 58 Parks RM 0 10/28/08 RM 0 4/15/09
985121003629409 RM 32 5/15/08 55 Kettle Springs 11/30/08
985161000042094 RM 32 5/9/08 56 RM 35 11/8/08 RM 36 1/13/09
105 Appendix 13 (cont): Nelson Ranch tagged coho upstream detections.
PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985161001299327 RM 32 5/16/08 58 RM 35 9/25/08 RM 35 Down 3/17/09 RM 0 3/20/09
985121003669351 RM 32 5/17/08 59 RM 35 12/26/08
985121003670704 RM 32 5/17/08 56 RM 35 11/4/08
985121003680853 RM 32 5/17/08 56 RM 35 12/26/08
985121003619464 RM 32 5/18/08 56 RM 35 Up 11/3/08 RM 35 Down 12/21/08
985161000971148 RM 32 5/19/08 60 RM 35 11/1/08 RM 35 4/8/09 RM 0 4/11/09
985121003617928 RM 32 5/20/08 59 RM 35 10/19/08
985121003621133 RM 32 5/15/08 65 Big Spring Outfall 8/21/08 Parks RM 0 Up 1/9/09 Parks RM 4 Down 4/4/09 Parks RM 0 Down 4/8/09 RM 0 4/15/09
985121003671814 RM 32 5/17/08 62 RM 35 12/19/08 Kettle Springs 12/22/08 Parks RM 0 4/5/09 RM 0 4/8/09
106 Appendix 13 (cont): Nelson Ranch tagged coho upstream detections.
PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985161000044556 RM 32 5/20/08 61 RM 35 Up 10/21/08 RM 35 Down 10/23/08 Kettle Springs 11/26/08 Parks RM 4 4/12/09 Parks RM 0 Down 4/13/09
985121004103162 RM 32 5/17/08 60 RM 35 Up 11/29/08 RM 35 Down 12/20/08 Kettle Springs 12/22/08
985161000042511 RM 32 5/20/08 58 RM 35 11/28/08 Parks RM 0 Down 2/20/09 RM 0 5/2/09
985161000977277 RM 32 5/20/08 58 RM 35 Up 10/31/08 RM 35 Down 11/19/08 Parks RM 0 3/18/09 RM 0 4/13/09
107 Appendix 14: Fall Nelson Upstream Hits Detection histories of BY2007 coho tagged at Nelson Ranch (RM 32) in the fall of 2008 that were later encountered at upstream locations. Each individual is presented with tagging information on the fist line, including PIT tag number, date and FL at tagging followed by a chronological list of encounters. The first and last encounter at each location is displayed, if greater than one week apart.
Detection Histories of Nelson Ranch Fall 2008 Tagged BY2007 Coho Later Encountered Upstream PIT Station Date FL (mm) 985121003662214 RM 32 10/17/08 102 Parks RM 0 4/13/09 RM 0 4/16/09
985121003669242 RM 32 10/22/08 113 Parks RM 0 10/27/08
985121003638990 RM 32 10/24/08 106 RM 35 Up 10/31/08 RM 36 1/12/09 RM 36 3/26/09 RM 35 Down 4/14/09 RM 0 4/17/09
985121003662436 RM 32 10/22/08 99 Kettle Springs 11/28/08 Parks RM 0 Down 3/18/09 RM 0 4/24/09
108 Appendix 15: HIG 3, HIG 5 Detection Histories Detection histories of BY2007 tagged in the HIG 3-5 (RM 36-36.8) area that were detected at least one week after tagging. Also includes individuals that were tagged at Nelson Ranch (RM 32) that were later encountered in the RM 36-36.8 area. Each individual is presented with tagging information on the fist line, including PIT tag number, date and FL at tagging followed by a chronological list of encounters. The first and last encounter at each location is displayed, if greater than one week apart.
Detection Histories of HIG 3 and HIG 5 (RM 36 and 36.8) 2008 Tagged BY2007 Coho PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985121003668232 RM 36.8 6/11/08 74 RM 36.8 2/23/09 RM 36 3/31/09 RM 36 4/24/09 RM 35 Down 4/28/09 RM 15 4/30/09
985121003680652 RM 36.8 6/18/08 75 RM 36.8 3/31/09 RM 36 4/1/09 RM 35 Down 4/10/09 RM 32 4/11/09 RM 15 4/13/09 RM 0 4/14/09
985121003668977 RM 36.8 6/18/08 73 RM 36.8 4/13/09 RM 35 4/23/09 RM 0 4/26/09
985121003670582 RM 36.8 6/25/08 112 RM 36.8 4/11/09 RM 36 4/17/09 RM 35 Down 5/3/09 RM 32 5/4/09 RM 15 5/5/09 RM 0 5/6/09
985121003596145 RM 36.8 8/27/08 97 RM 36.8 4/10/09 RM 36 4/22/09 RM 36 5/5/09 RM 35 Down 5/6/09 RM 0 5/9/09
109 Appendix 15 (cont): HIG 3, HIG 5 Detection Histories
PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985121003671402 RM 36.8 9/3/08 90 RM 36.8 4/12/09 RM 36 4/23/09 RM 36 5/5/09 RM 35 Down 5/6/09 RM 15 5/8/09
985121003670843 RM 36.8 9/3/08 88 RM 36.8 4/17/09 RM 36 4/22/09 RM 35 Down 4/22/09 RM 15 4/23/09 RM 0 4/25/09
985121003659473 RM 36.8 9/3/08 73 RM 36.8 4/18/09 RM 35 Down 4/27/09 RM 0 5/1/09
985121003668543 RM 36.8 9/3/08 102 RM 36.8 4/10/09 RM 36 4/22/09 RM 35 Down 4/27/09 RM 0 4/30/09
985121003669381 RM 36.8 9/3/08 83 RM 36.8 4/21/09 RM 36 4/22/09 RM 36 5/10/09 RM 35 Down 5/14/09 RM 0 5/17/09
985121003670285 RM 36.8 9/3/08 90 RM 36.8 4/20/09 RM 36 4/21/09 RM 35 Down 4/22/09 RM 32 4/22/09 RM 0 4/26/09
985121003667304 RM 36.8 9/3/08 91 RM 36.8 2/23/09 RM 35 5/6/09 RM 32 5/7/09 RM 0 5/9/09
110 Appendix 15 (cont): HIG 3, HIG 5 Detection Histories
PIT Location Date FL (mm)
985121003671660 RM 36.8 9/3/08 81 RM 36.8 4/11/09 RM 36 4/15/09 RM 35 Down 4/21/09 RM 32 4/22/09 RM 0 4/24/09
985121003671777 RM 36.8 9/9/08 95 RM 36.8 3/28/09 RM 36 4/21/09 RM 35 Down 4/23/09 RM 0 4/26/09
985121003671209 RM 36.8 9/9/08 90 RM 36.8 4/11/09 RM 36 4/15/09 RM 35 Down 4/23/09 RM 15 4/24/09 RM 0 4/27/09
985121003659393 RM 36.8 9/9/08 85 RM 36.8 4/10/09 RM 35 4/24/09 RM 0 4/27/09
985121003667739 RM 36.8 9/9/08 97 RM 36.8 4/10/09 RM 35 Down 5/1/09 RM 32 5/1/09 RM 0 5/4/09
985121003660916 RM 36.8 9/9/08 88 RM 36.8 4/10/09 RM 36 4/16/09 RM 35 Down 4/21/09 RM 32 4/22/09 RM 15 4/23/09 RM 0 4/25/09
111 Appendix 15 (cont): HIG 3, HIG 5 Detection Histories
PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985121003669388 RM 36.8 10/1/08 95 RM 36.8 12/20/09 RM 36 2/11/09 RM 36 4/10/09 RM 35 Down 4/24/09 RM 15 4/26/09 RM 0 4/27/09
985121003683418 RM 36.8 10/22/08 97 RM 36.8 4/21/09 RM 36 5/6/09 RM 35 Down 5/11/09 RM 32 5/12/09 RM 0 5/15/09
985121004101777 RM 36.8 10/22/08 87 RM 36.8 4/4/09 RM 36 4/21/09 RM 35 Down 4/22/09 RM 0 4/25/09
985121003659921 RM 36.8 10/22/08 100 RM 36.8 4/13/09 RM 36 4/22/09 RM 36 5/5/09 RM 35 Down 5/6/09 RM 0 5/10/09
985121003671557 RM 36.8 10/22/08 87 RM 36.8 4/11/09 RM 36 4/13/09 RM 36 5/5/09 RM 35 Down 5/6/09 RM 0 5/8/09
985121003680623 RM 36.8 10/22/08 88 RM 36.8 4/21/09 RM 36 5/10/09 RM 35 Down 5/14/09 RM 32 5/14/09 RM 0 5/17/09
112 Appendix 15 (cont): HIG 3, HIG 5 Detection Histories
PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985121003660069 RM 36.8 10/22/08 91 RM 36.8 4/21/09 RM 36 4/22/09 RM 35 Down 4/23/09 RM 0 4/26/09
985121003660673 RM 36.8 10/22/08 97 RM 36.8 3/26/09 RM 36 4/22/09 RM 35 Down 4/22/09 RM 32 4/23/09 RM 0 4/26/09
985121003661529 RM 36.8 10/22/08 90 RM 36.8 4/11/09 RM 36 4/22/09 RM 35 Down 4/24/09 RM 15 4/27/09 RM 0 4/29/09
985121003667465 RM 36.8 12/10/08 94 RM 36.8 3/27/09 RM 36 4/21/09 RM 35 Down 5/5/09 RM 32 5/5/09 RM 0 5/7/09
985121003668602 RM 36.8 12/10/08 105 RM 36.8 4/15/09 RM 35 Down 4/28/09 RM 32 4/29/09 RM 0 5/1/09
985121003668865 RM 36.8 12/10/08 109 RM 36.8 4/10//09 RM 36 4/16/09 RM 32 4/22/09 RM 0 4/24/09
985161000975587 RM 36 6/3/08 72 RM 36 3/17/09 RM 35 Down 3/25/09 RM 0 4/12/09
113 Appendix 15 (cont): HIG 3, HIG 5 Detection Histories
PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985121003611331 RM 36 6/3/08 70 RM 36 5/6/09 RM 35 Down 5/7/09 RM 0 5/9/09
985121003621937 RM 36 6/3/08 69 RM 36 3/26/09 RM 35 4/25/09 RM 0 4/29/09
985121003660670 RM 36 6/4/08 74 RM 36.8 12/31/09 RM 36.8 4/3/09 RM 36 4/22/09 RM 35 Down 5/4/09 RM 32 5/5/09 RM 0 5/6/09
985121003659719 RM 36 6/4/08 92 RM 36 3/10/09 RM 35 Down 4/12/09 RM 15 4/14/09 RM 0 4/16/09
985121003667974 RM 36 6/4/08 79 RM 36 2/1/09 RM 35 Down 3/17/09 RM 0 3/20/09
985121003668890 RM 36 11/12/08 99 RM 36 1/14/09 RM 35 Down 4/8/09 RM 0 4/13/09
985121003670192 RM 36 11/12/08 102 RM 36 3/28/09 RM 35 Down 4/12/09 RM 15 4/14/09 RM 0 4/17/09
985121003670470 RM 36 11/12/08 115 RM 36 3/27/09 RM 35 Down 3/29/09 RM 32 3/29/09
114 Appendix 15 (cont): HIG 3, HIG 5 Detection Histories
PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985121003670407 RM 36 11/12/08 104 RM 36 3/30/09 RM 35 Down 4/24/09 RM 0 4/26/09
985121003662967 RM 36 11/12/08 110 RM 36 3/27/09 RM 35 Down 4/2/09 RM 0 4/11/09
985121003670747 RM 36 11/12/08 115 RM 36 3/28/09 RM 35 Down 4/14/09 RM 0 4/19/09
985121003683501 RM 36 11/12/08 108 RM 36 4/10/09 RM 35 Down 4/17/09 RM 15 4/19/09 RM 0 4/20/09
985121003014359 RM 36 11/12/08 102 RM 36 12/11/08 RM 35 Down 4/11/09 RM 0 4/17/09
985121003680990 RM 36 11/12/08 105 RM 36 4/30/09 RM 35 Down 5/4/09 RM 0 5/6/09
985121003669522 RM 36 12/10/08 104 RM 36 3/30/09 RM 35 Down 4/16/09 RM 0 4/19/09
985121003669790 RM 36 12/10/08 102 RM 35 Down 3/21/09 RM 0 3/24/09
985121003670223 RM 36 12/10/08 110 RM 36 4/1/09 RM 35 Down 5/6/09 RM 32 5/7/09 RM 0 5/9/09
115 Appendix 15 (cont): HIG 3, HIG 5 Detection Histories
PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985121003670370 RM 36 12/10/08 109 RM 35 Down 4/22/09 RM 15 4/23/09 RM 0 4/24/09
985121003670375 RM 36 12/10/08 110 RM 36 3/28/09 RM 35 Down 4/19/09 RM 0 4/22/09
985121003670797 RM 36 12/10/08 130 RM 36 3/31/09 RM 35 Down 5/4/09 RM 0 5/6/09
985121003662092 RM 36 12/10/08 100 RM 36 2/20/09 RM 35 Down 4/16/09 RM 0 4/21/09
985121003662635 RM 36 12/10/08 112 RM 36 3/29/09 RM 35 4/24/09 RM 15 4/25/09 RM 0 4/27/09
985121003666176 RM 36 12/10/08 117 RM 36 3/25/09 RM 35 Down 4/11/09 RM 32 4/11/09 RM 15 4/12/09 RM 0 4/14/09
985121003659162 RM 36 12/10/08 127 RM 36 2/4/09 RM 35 Down 4/16/09 RM 15 4/18/09 RM 0 4/19/09
985121003659218 RM 36 12/10/08 110 RM 36 1/18/09 RM 35 Down 3/26/09 RM 0 4/10/09
116 Appendix 15 (cont): HIG 3, HIG 5 Detection Histories
PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985121003659264 RM 36 12/10/08 109
RM 36 3/31/09 RM 35 Down 4/16/09 RM 32 4/16/09 RM 0 4/19/09
985121003659343 RM 36 12/10/08 113 RM 36 3/17/09 RM 35 Down 3/25/09 RM 0 3/27/09
985121003667493 RM 36 12/10/08 109 RM 36 2/15/00 RM 35 Down 4/1709 RM 15 4/18/09 RM 0 4/20/09
985121003668359 RM 36 12/10/08 121 RM 36 3/28/09 RM 35 Down 4/6/09 RM 0 4/14/09
985121003668468 RM 36 12/10/08 98 RM 36 3/17/09 RM 35 3/28/09 RM 0 4/7/09
985121003668586 RM 36 12/10/08 113 RM 36 4/21/09 RM 35 Down 5/6/09 RM 32 5/6/09 RM 0 5/8/09
985121003668862 RM 36 12/10/08 110 RM 36 4/16/09 RM 35 Down 5/4/09 RM 0 5/6/09
985121003659426 RM 36 12/10/08 120 RM 36 3/20/09 RM 35 Down 5/8/09 RM 0 5/11/09
117 Appendix 15 (cont): HIG 3, HIG 5 Detection Histories
PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985121003680441 RM 36 12/10/08 120 RM 35 Down 4/6/09 RM 15 4/7/09 RM 0 4/12/09
985121003681631 RM 36 12/10/08 103 RM 36 1/5/09 RM 35 Down 4/5/09 RM 15 4/11/09 RM 0 4/13/09
985121003681966 RM 36 12/10/08 112 RM 36 5/3/09 RM 35 Down 5/6/09 RM 15 5/8/09 RM 0 5/9/09
985121004103563 RM 36 12/10/08 113 RM 36 3/24/09 RM 35 Down 4/16/09 RM 15 4/19/09 RM 0 4/20/09
985121003671587 RM 36 12/10/08 100 RM 36 3/6/09 RM 35 Down 4/17/09 RM 15 4/19/09
985121003667272 RM 36 12/10/08 100 RM 36 4/10/09 RM 35 Down 5/7/09 RM 15 5/8/09
985161001010158 RM 32 4/29/08 62 RM 36 6/8/08 RM 0 4/16/09
985121003669538 RM 32 6/4/08 85 RM 36 6/15/08 RM 36 4/15/09 RM 35 Down 4/16/09 RM 0 4/19/09
118 Appendix 15 (cont): HIG 3, HIG 5 Detection Histories
PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985161001298907 RM 32 6/6/08 87 RM 36 6/9/08 RM 36.8 2/25/09 RM 36 4/21/09 RM 35 Down 5/3/09 RM 0 5/6/09
985121003638990 RM 32 10/24/08 106 RM 35 Up 10/31/09 RM 36 1/12/09 RM 36 3/26/09 RM 35 Down 4/14/09 RM 0 4/17/09
985121003671630 RM 36.8 6/11/08 87 RM 36.8 4/10/09 RM 36 4/22/09 RM 35 Down 4/18/09 RM 32 5/18/09
985121004103122 RM 36.8 9/9/08 92 RM 36.8 3/30/09 RM 35 Down 5/6/09
985121003683707 RM 36.8 9/9/08 83 RM 36.8 4/16/09 RM 36 4/22/09 RM 35 Down 5/4/09
985121003671525 RM 36.8 9/9/08 80 RM 36.8 4/10/09 RM 36 4/22/09 RM 35 Down 4/24/09
985121003668844 RM 36.8 9/9/08 87 RM 36.8 4/22/09 RM 36 4/23/09 RM 35 Down 5/7/09
985121003667381 RM 36.8 10/1/08 92 RM 36.8 4/6/09 RM 36 4/16/09 RM 35 Down 4/21/09
119 Appendix 15 (cont): HIG 3, HIG 5 Detection Histories
PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985121003671036 RM 36.8 10/22/08 98 RM 36.8 2/23/09 RM 36 4/17/09 RM 35 Down 4/22/09
985121003015485 RM 36.8 10/22/08 92 RM 36.8 4/10/09 RM 36 4/23/09 RM 35 Down 4/24/09
985121003681685 RM 36.8 12/10/08 116 RM 36.8 4/2/09 RM 36 4/20/09 RM 35 Down 4/23/09
985161000045916 RM 36 5/28/08 79 RM 36 3/24/09 RM 35 Down 4/12/09
985161000975454 RM 36 5/28/08 69 RM 36.8 1/1/09 RM 36.8 3/20/09 RM 35 Down 5/5/09 RM 32 5/6/09
985121003660743 RM 36 6/4/08 86 RM 36 2/18/09 RM 35 Down 5/4/09
985121003680370 RM 36 12/10/08 110 RM 36 2/2/09 RM 35 Down 5/6/09
985121003660271 RM 36 12/10/08 102 RM 36 3/30/09 RM 35 Down 5/6/09 RM 32 5/7/09
985121003659659 RM 36 12/10/08 109 RM 36 5/6/09 RM 35 Down 5/6/09
120 Appendix 15 (cont): HIG 3, HIG 5 Detection Histories
PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985121003610721 RM 32 5/18/08 64 RM 36 5/30/08 RM 36.8 4/21/09 RM 36 4/22/09 RM 35 Down 4/22/09
985161001019021 RM 32 5/2/08 67 RM 36.8 9/26/08 RM 36.8 4/10/09 RM 36 4/21/09 RM 35 Down 4/22/09
985121003621512 RM 32 5/22/08 76 RM 36 6/19/08 RM 36 4/22/09 RM 35 Down 5/1/09
985121003682838 RM 36.8 6/4/08 74 RM 36.8 4/13/09 RM 36 4/22/09
985121003670560 RM 36.8 6/4/08 70 RM 36.8 4/10/09
985121003669532 RM 36.8 6/18/08 84 RM 36.8 4/12/09 RM 36 4/22/09
985121003683512 RM 36.8 6/18/08 78 RM 36.8 4/19/09
985121003684925 RM 36.8 6/25/08 84 RM 36.8 3/20/09 RM 36 4/22/09
985121003682121 RM 36.8 6/25/08 83 RM 36.8 3/17/09 RM 36 3/19/09
985121003671281 RM 36.8 6/25/08 78 RM 36.8 5/4/09 RM 36 5/8/09
985121003671553 RM 36.8 8/20/08 105 RM 36.8 4/13/09 RM 36 4/16/09
121 Appendix 15 (cont): HIG 3, HIG 5 Detection Histories
PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985121003016223 RM 36.8 8/27/08 86 RM 36.8 4/20/09
985121003638937 RM 36.8 8/27/08 94 RM 36.8 4/13/09 RM 36 4/21/09 RM 36 5/10/09
985121003662803 RM 36.8 8/27/08 106 RM 36.8 5/4/09
985121003668841 RM 36.8 9/3/08 105 RM 36.8 4/10/09 RM 36 4/17/09
985121003659412 RM 36.8 9/3/08 79 RM 36.8 4/10/09 RM 36 5/4/09
985121003671569 RM 36.8 9/3/08 88 RM 36.8 4/11/09 RM 36 5/5/09 RM 36 5/29/09
985121003670815 RM 36.8 9/9/08 83 RM 36.8 4/19/09 RM 36 4/22/09
985121003671272 RM 36.8 9/9/08 104 RM 36.8 4/20/09 RM 36 4/23/09
985121003680433 RM 36.8 9/9/08 92 RM 36.8 4/20/09 RM 36 4/22/09
985121003661661 RM 36.8 9/9/08 106 RM 36.8 4/18/09 RM 36 4/24/09
985121003667151 RM 36.8 9/9/08 84 RM 36.8 3/27/09 RM 36 4/22/09
985121003659614 RM 36.8 9/9/08 94 RM 36.8 4/1/09
122 Appendix 15 (cont): HIG 3, HIG 5 Detection Histories
PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985121003659654 RM 36.8 9/9/08 86 RM 36.8 4/6/09 RM 36 4/22/09 RM 36 5/5/09
985121003659092 RM 36.8 9/9/08 88 RM 36.8 3/16/09 RM 36 3/22/09 RM 36 4/13/09
985121003641484 RM 36.8 9/9/08 78 RM 36.8 4/13/09
985121003659279 RM 36.8 9/9/08 105 RM 36.8 3/28/09 RM 36 5/5/09
985121003641122 RM 36.8 10/22/08 96 RM 36.8 3/17/09
985121004105705 RM 36.8 10/22/08 94 RM 36.8 4/15/09 RM 36 4/25/09
985121003664315 RM 36.8 10/22/08 90 RM 36.8 5/4/09 RM 36 5/5/09
985121003680910 RM 36.8 10/22/08 98 RM 36.8 4/4/09 RM 36 4/22/09
985121003660933 RM 36.8 12/10/08 107 RM 36.8 2/24/09 RM 36 4/17/09
985121003670507 RM 36.8 12/10/08 95 RM 36.8 12/23/08 RM 36 4/7/09
985121003666330 RM 36.8 12/10/08 99 RM 36.8 2/22/09 RM 36 4/22/09
985121003659556 RM 36.8 12/10/08 119 RM 36.8 4/10/09
123 Appendix 15 (cont): HIG 3, HIG 5 Detection Histories
PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985121003659721 RM 36.8 12/10/08 105 RM 36.8 4/14/09
985121003668671 RM 36.8 12/10/08 99 RM 36.8 3/18/09 RM 36 4/22/09 RM 36 5/10/09
985121003668799 RM 36.8 12/10/08 111 RM 36.8 4/5/09
985121003610895 RM 36 5/28/08 62 RM 36.8 4/7/09 RM 36 4/17/09
985121003614122 RM 36 6/3/08 80 RM 36 4/16/09
985121003621861 RM 36 6/3/08 78 RM 36.8 9/24/08 RM 36.8 4/10/09 RM 36 5/4/09 RM 36 5/12/09
985121003683006 RM 36 6/4/08 74 RM 36.8 4/14/09 RM 36 4/22/09 RM 36 5/9/09
985121003668776 RM 36 11/12/08 107 RM 36 4/16/09
985121003669899 RM 36 12/10/08 116 RM 36 5/4/09
985121003669713 RM 36 12/10/08 119 RM 36 3/31/09
985121004103218 RM 36 12/10/08 110 RM 36 4/16/09
985121003659809 RM 36 12/10/08 103 RM 36 5/3/09
985121003683997 RM 36 12/10/08 96 RM 36 3/17/09
124 Appendix 15 (cont): HIG 3, HIG 5 Detection Histories
PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985121003660162 RM 36 12/10/08 107 RM 36 5/9/09
985121003670202 RM 36 12/10/08 107 RM 36 3/17/09
985121003610895 RM 32 5/21/08 62 RM 36 5/28/08 RM 36.8 4/7/09 RM 36 4/17/09
985121003671353 RM 36.8 6/18/08 80 RM 36.8 8/29/08
985121003670389 RM 36.8 8/20/08 104 RM 36.8 2/25/09
985121003671003 RM 36.8 8/27/08 87 RM 36.8 12/17/09
985121003668088 RM 36.8 9/3/08 78 RM 36.8 12/25/08
985121003659254 RM 36.8 9/3/08 103 RM 36.8 9/7/09
985121003663551 RM 36.8 9/9/08 100 RM 36.8 12/19/08
985121003663805 RM 36.8 9/9/08 92 RM 36.8 1/22/09 RM 36 1/30/09
985121003664053 RM 36.8 9/9/08 89 RM 36.8 12/27/08
985121003683970 RM 36.8 10/1/08 103 RM 36.8 12/22/08
985121003659557 RM 36.8 10/1/08 94 RM 36.8 2/15/09
985121003669420 RM 36.8 10/22/08 95 RM 36.8 2/23/09
125 Appendix 15 (cont): HIG 3, HIG 5 Detection Histories
PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985121004101642 RM 36.8 10/22/08 104 RM 36.8 1/22/09
985121003671083 RM 36.8 12/10/08 103 RM 36.8 2/25/09
985121003666917 RM 36.8 12/10/08 99 RM 36.8 2/7/09
985161000971454 RM 36 5/28/08 71 RM 36 2/5/09
985121003617542 RM 36 6/3/08 71 RM 36.8 7/14/08 RM 36.8 12/28/08
985121003610234 RM 36 6/3/08 69 RM 36 9/17/08
985121003642005 RM 36 11/12/08 103 RM 36 1/2/09
985121003668007 RM 36 11/12/08 122 RM 36 12/26/08
985121003667405 RM 36 11/12/08 111 RM 36 1/2/09
985121003668196 RM 36 12/10/08 120 RM 36 12/19/08
985121003683428 RM 36 12/10/08 123 RM 36 1/17/09
985121003667300 RM 36 12/10/08 122 RM 36 1/18/09
985161000042094 RM 32 5/9/08 56 RM 35 11/8/08 RM 36 1/13/09
985121003671384 RM 32 5/17/08 57 RM 36 6/7/08 RM 36.8 1/1/09 RM 36.8 2/14/09
126 Appendix 15 (cont): HIG 3, HIG 5 Detection Histories
PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985161001298321 RM 32 5/20/08 62 RM 36 6/24/08 RM 36.8 6/26/08
985121003610197 RM 32 5/18/08 57 RM 36 6/31/09
985121003619917 RM 36 6/3/08 91 SRKM 43 6/6/08
985121003669429 RM 36 12/10/08 114 RM 36 12/23/09 RM 35 Down 12/25/08
127 Appendix 16. Detection histories of BY2007 coho tagged in the HIG 2 vicinity (RM 35.2) site. Each individual is presented with tagging information on the fist line, including PIT tag number, date and FL at tagging followed by a chronological list of encounters. The first and last encounter at each location is displayed, if greater than one week apart.
Detection Histories of HIG 2 (RM 35.2) 2008 Tagged BY2007 Coho PIT Station Date FL (mm) 985121003669407 RM 35.2 10/22/08 112 RM 36 12/28/08 RM 36 3/30/09 RM 35 Down 4/14/09 RM 15 4/16/09 RM 0 4/19/09
985121003669807 RM 35.2 12/2/08 98 RM 35 12/16/08 RM 36 1/6/09 RM 36 3/28/09 RM 35 Down 4/15/09 RM 0 4/19/09
985121003667449 RM 35.2 12/2/08 105 RM 35 Down 4/10/09 RM 15 4/13/09 RM 0 4/19/09
985121003668875 RM 35.2 9/9/08 101 RM 35 12/24/09 RM 0 4/11/09
985121003663267 RM 35.2 9/9/08 91 RM 35 Down 12/20/08 RM 15 4/11/09 RM 0 4/19/09
985121003659530 RM 35.2 10/22/08 92 RM 35 Down 12/28/08 Parks RM 0 Down 4/11/09 RM 0 4/19/09
985121003668633 RM 35.2 10/22/08 109 RM 35 Down 4/12/09
985121003660268 RM 35.2 12/2/08 115 RM 36 2/3/09 RM 36 3/28/09
128 Appendix 16 (cont): Detection Histories of HIG 2 (RM 35.2) 2008 Tagged BY2007 Coho PIT Station Date FL (mm) 985121003669398 RM 35.2 12/2/08 105 RM 35 Down 12/20/08 Parks RM 0 Up 2/19/09
985121003661223 RM 35.2 12/2/08 110 RM 35 Down 12/20/09 Parks RM 0 Down 4/21/09
985121003670732 RM 35.2 12/2/08 103 RM 35 Down 12/3/08 Parks RM 0 Down 3/24/09 RM 15 4/5/09
985121003683827 RM 35.2 10/22/08 113 Parks RM 0 Down 3/17/09 RM 0 3/21/09
985121003660129 RM 35.2 10/22/08 108 RM 35 Down 12/16/08 Parks RM 0 Down 3/27/09 RM 15 4/7/09
985121003670516 RM 35.2 12/2/08 114 RM 35 12/25/08 RM 15 4/15/09
985121003670799 RM 35.2 12/2/08 113 RM 35 Down 12/6/08
985121004105530 RM 35.2 9/9/08 112 RM 35 Down 12/17/08
985121003659610 RM 35.2 12/2/08 111 RM 35 Down 12/28/08
985121003671645 RM 35.2 12/2/08 109
985121003618132 RM 35.2 9/9/08 100
985121003671574 RM 35.2 12/2/08 118
985121003660690 RM 35.2 12/2/08 109
985121003717130 RM 35.2 12/2/08 121
985121003640950 RM 35.2 9/9/08 96
129 Appendix 17: BSOF detection histories Detection histories of BY2007 coho tagged at Big Springs Creek outfall that were detected at least a month after tagging. Each individual is presented with tagging information on the fist line, including PIT tag number, date and FL at tagging followed by a chronological list of encounters. The first and last encounter at each location is displayed, if greater than one week apart.
Detection Histories of Big Springs Outfall 2008 Tagged BY2007 Coho PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985121003667494 Big Springs Outfall 8/7/08 107 RM 35 12/21/08 Parks RM 0 3/24/09 RM 0 4/5/09
985121003670898 Big Springs Outfall 9/8/08 108 Big Springs Outfall 11/21/08 Parks RM 0 4/19/09 RM 15 4/21/09 RM 0 4/24/09
985121003669757 Big Springs Outfall 8/7/08 100 Big Springs Outfall 11/24/08 Kettle Springs 11/29/08 Parks RM 0 3/18/09 RM 0 4/20/09
985121003667342 Big Springs Outfall 9/8/08 102 Big Springs Outfall 11/25/08 Kettle Springs 12/1/08 Parks RM 0 4/15/09 RM 15 4/16/09
985121004105795 Big Springs Outfall 9/8/08 111 Big Springs Outfall 11/24/08 Parks RM 0 3/18/09 RM 32 3/19/09 RM 0 4/20/09
985121003671790 Big Springs Outfall 11/13/08 121 Big Springs Outfall 11/27/08 RM 0 4/22/09
985121003666957 Big Springs Outfall 9/8/08 108 Big Springs Outfall 9/10/08 RM 15 4/18/09 RM 0 4/22/09
130 Appendix 17 (cont.):Detection Histories of Big Springs Outfall 2008 Tagged BY2007 Coho PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985121003669535 Big Springs Outfall 11/13/08 132 Big Springs Outfall 11/14/08 RM 15 4/24/09 RM 0 4/26/09
985121003664721 Big Springs Outfall 11/13/08 127 Big Springs Outfall 11/17/08 RM 0 4/13/09
985121003667062 Big Springs Outfall 11/13/08 133 Big Springs Outfall 11/21/08 RM 0 4/22/09
985121003659253 Big Springs Outfall 11/13/08 119 RM 0 3/28/09
985121003642429 Big Springs Outfall 11/13/08 119 Big Springs Outfall 11/21/08 RM 15 4/9/09 RM 0 4/13/09 150
985121003668652 Big Springs Outfall 9/8/08 110 Big Springs Outfall 11/21/08 RM 15 4/3/09 RM 0 4/14/09
985121003668882 Big Springs Outfall 9/8/08 102 RM 0 4/15/09
985121003639024 Big Springs Outfall 11/13/08 117 RM 32 3/19/09 RM 0 3/20/09
985121003670953 Big Springs Outfall 9/8/08 104 Big Springs Outfall 9/10/08 RM 0 4/22/09
985121003669302 Big Springs Outfall 9/8/08 106 Big Springs Outfall 11/21/08 RM 15 4/23/09 RM 0 4/25/09
131 Appendix 17 (cont.):Detection Histories of Big Springs Outfall 2008 Tagged BY2007 Coho PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985121003659133 Big Springs Outfall 9/8/08 105 Big Springs Outfall 11/17/08 RM 0 4/23/09
985121003662721 Big Springs Outfall 8/7/08 104 Big Springs Outfall 8/14/08 RM 15 5/16/09 RM 0 5/18/09
985121003681892 Big Springs Outfall 11/13/08 129 Big Springs Outfall 11/16/08 RM 0 4/17/09 151
985121003670469 Big Springs Outfall 8/7/08 96 RM 15 4/2/09 RM 0 4/5/09
985121004100173 Big Springs Outfall 11/13/08 115 Big Springs Outfall 11/17/08 RM 0 4/20/09 135
985121003668435 Big Springs Outfall 9/8/08 102 Big Springs Outfall 9/10/08 RM 15 4/7/09 RM 0 4/19/09
985121003669772 Big Springs Outfall 8/7/08 98 Big Springs Outfall 8/9/08 RM 0 4/14/09
985121003683597 Big Springs Outfall 11/13/08 118 Big Springs Outfall 11/21/08 RM 15 2/26/09 RM 0 3/26/09
985121003662040 Big Springs Outfall 9/8/08 104 Big Springs Outfall 9/10/08 RM 15 1/20/09 RM 0 5/3/09
985121003667747 Big Springs Outfall 11/13/08 121 Big Springs Outfall 2/25/09 RM 15 4/9/09 RM 0 4/14/09
132 Appendix 17 (cont.):Detection Histories of Big Springs Outfall 2008 Tagged BY2007 Coho PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985121003671312 Big Springs Outfall 9/8/08 103 Big Springs Outfall 1/24/09 RM 32 4/6/09 RM 15 4/14/09 RM 0 4/21/09
985121003659270 Big Springs Outfall 11/13/08 120 Big Springs Outfall 2/20/09 RM 15 4/20/09 RM 0 4/20/09 149
985121003640649 Big Springs Outfall 9/8/08 110 Big Springs Outfall 12/22/08 RM 15 4/10/09 RM 0 4/20/09
985121003667389 Big Springs Outfall 9/8/08 113 Big Springs Outfall 3/12/09 RM 0 4/20/09 164
985121003663668 Big Springs Outfall 11/13/08 117 Big Springs Outfall 3/3/09 RM 15 4/3/09 RM 0 4/14/09 148
985121003668940 Big Springs Outfall 11/13/08 108 Big Springs Outfall 3/20/09 RM 0 4/11/09 140
985121003667288 Big Springs Outfall 9/8/08 105 Big Springs Outfall 11/17/08 RM 15 3/26/09
985121003669449 Big Springs Outfall 9/8/08 109 Big Springs Outfall 3/12/09 RM 15 3/15/09
985121003668979 Big Springs Outfall 8/7/08 103 Big Springs Outfall 11/21/08 RM 35 12/6/08
985121003664116 Big Springs Outfall 8/7/08 105 Big Springs Outfall 11/17/08
133 Appendix 17 (cont.):Detection Histories of Big Springs Outfall 2008 Tagged BY2007 Coho PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985121003666518 Big Springs Outfall 8/7/08 105 Big Springs Outfall 11/21/08
985121003683737 Big Springs Outfall 8/7/08 95 Big Springs Outfall 11/22/08
985121003668973 Big Springs Outfall 9/8/08 110 Big Springs Outfall 11/18/08
985121003659464 Big Springs Outfall 9/8/08 103 Big Springs Outfall 11/25/08
985121003016000 Big Springs Outfall 9/8/08 99 Big Springs Outfall 11/18/08
985121003668385 Big Springs Outfall 9/8/08 102 Big Springs Outfall 11/17/08
985121003660876 Big Springs Outfall 8/7/08 97 Big Springs Outfall 9/8/08 105
985121003667217 Big Springs Outfall 9/8/08 117 Big Springs Outfall 11/20/08
985121004102491 Big Springs Outfall 9/8/08 105 Big Springs Outfall 11/25/08
985121003670168 Big Springs Outfall 9/8/08 117 Big Springs Outfall 11/18/08
985121003668571 Big Springs Outfall 9/8/08 116 Big Springs Outfall 11/21/08
985121003671398 Big Springs Outfall 11/13/08 127 Big Springs Outfall 1/20/09
985121003680783 Big Springs Outfall 11/13/08 130 Big Springs Outfall 1/26/09
985121003667475 Big Springs Outfall 9/8/08 108 Big Springs Outfall 12/25/08
985121003668564 Big Springs Outfall 11/13/08 123 Big Springs Outfall 2/26/09
134 Appendix 17 (cont.):Detection Histories of Big Springs Outfall 2008 Tagged BY2007 Coho PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985121003715286 Big Springs Outfall 8/7/08 89 Big Springs Outfall 1/25/09
985121003670161 Big Springs Outfall 11/13/08 111 Big Springs Outfall 3/6/09
135 Appendix 18: Big Springs RM 1.5 tagged coho detection histories Detection histories of BY2007 coho tagged at Big Springs Creek RM 1.5 that were later encountered. Each individual is presented with tagging information on the fist line, including PIT tag number, date and FL at tagging followed by a chronological list of encounters. The first and last encounter at each location is displayed, if greater than one week apart. Detection Histories of Big Springs RM 1.5 2008 BY2007 Tagged Coho PIT Location Date FL (mm) 985121003660837 Big Springs RM 1.5 12/5/08 126 Parks RM 0 Up 1/21/09 Parks RM 0 Down 4/11/09 RM 0 4/21/09
985121003664308 Big Springs RM 1.5 12/5/08 114 Parks RM 0 Up 3/12/09 Parks RM 0 Down 3/21/09 RM 35 Up 3/21/09 RM 35 Down 4/16/09 RM 0 4/20/09
985121003660232 Big Springs RM 1.5 12/5/08 110 RM 0 3/19/09
985121003666899 Big Springs RM 1.5 12/5/08 119 RM 0 4/15/09
985121003669537 Big Springs RM 1.5 12/5/08 111 RM 0 3/28/09
985121003670557 Big Springs RM 1.5 12/5/08 116 RM 0 4/20/09
985121003684775 Big Springs RM 1.5 12/5/08 111 RM 0 4/14/09
985121004105724 Big Springs RM 1.5 12/5/08 108 RM 0 4/21/09
985121003667479 Big Springs RM 1.5 12/5/08 109 RM 15 4/19/09
985121003681209 Big Springs RM 1.5 12/5/08 105 RM 15 4/22/09
136 Appendix 19: Kettle Springs tagged coho detection histories. Detection histories of BY2007 coho tagged at Kettle Springs. Each individual is presented with tagging information on the fist line, including PIT tag number, date and FL at tagging followed by a chronological list of encounters. The first and last encounter at each location is displayed, if greater than one week apart. Detection Histories of Kettle Springs 2008 Tagged BY2007 Coho FL PIT Location Date (mm) 985121003662983 Kettle Springs 8/26/08 101 Kettle Springs 10/1/08 Parks RM 4 4/2/09 Parks RM 0 Down 4/8/09 RM 0 4/14/09
985121003683778 Kettle Springs 8/6/08 96 Kettle Springs 9/2/08 RM 15 4/6/09 RM 0 4/17/09
985121003668558 Kettle Springs 10/22/08 123 Kettle Springs 2/10/09 Parks RM 0 Down 3/18/09
985121003639824 Kettle Springs 8/6/08 110 Kettle Springs 8/31/08
985121003669942 Kettle Springs 9/3/08 112 Kettle Springs 12/19/08
985121003670346 Kettle Springs 8/6/08 95 Kettle Springs 9/3/08
985121003671065 Kettle Springs 10/22/08 124 Kettle Springs 12/17/08
137 Appendix 20: Fork length, location, and date of tagging and recapture at RM 0 FL Tagging Tagging FL (mm) at Recapture Recapture Growth Days of Location Date Tagging FL(mm) Date (mm) Growth RM 32 4/17/08 56 144 4/18/09 88 366 RM 32 4/29/08 62 182 4/15/09 120 351 RM 32 4/29/08 62 158 4/16/09 96 352 RM 32 5/8/08 56 151 4/14/09 95 341 RM 32 5/13/08 59 124 4/25/09 65 347 RM 32 5/16/08 56 143 4/16/09 87 335 RM 32 5/16/08 57 133 4/20/09 76 339 RM 32 5/16/08 63 134 4/14/09 71 333 RM 32 5/17/08 57 130 4/20/09 73 338 RM 32 5/17/08 58 146 4/18/09 88 336 RM 32 5/17/08 59 152 4/11/09 93 329 RM 32 5/17/08 60 133 4/11/09 73 329 RM 32 5/17/08 81 169 4/11/09 88 329 RM 32 5/18/08 66 150 4/21/09 84 338 RM 32 5/18/08 67 141 4/13/09 74 330 RM 32 5/18/08 70 150 4/11/09 80 328 RM 32 5/19/08 57 139 4/14/09 82 330 RM 32 5/19/08 59 176 4/16/09 117 332 RM 32 5/19/08 75 140 4/11/09 65 327 RM 32 5/20/08 58 135 5/2/09 77 347 RM 32 5/20/08 58 131 4/13/09 73 328 RM 32 5/20/08 60 151 4/16/09 91 331 RM 32 5/20/08 65 145 3/25/09 80 309 RM 32 5/21/08 57 145 4/20/09 88 334 RM 32 5/22/08 64 160 4/25/09 96 338 RM 32 5/23/08 56 152 4/20/09 96 332 RM 32 6/4/08 85 147 4/20/09 62 320 RM 32 6/6/08 63 140 4/23/09 77 321 RM 32 6/6/08 72 143 4/11/09 71 309 RM 32 10/24/08 109 138 4/15/09 29 173 RM 32 4/7/09 140 146 4/25/09 6 18 RM 32 5/6/09 118 119 5/15/09 1 9 RM 35.2 12/2/08 98 135 4/20/09 37 139 RM 35.2 12/2/08 105 134 4/22/09 29 141 RM 36 6/3/08 69 143 4/29/09 74 330 RM 36 6/4/08 74 128 5/7/09 54 337 RM 36 6/4/08 92 168 4/16/09 76 316 RM 36 11/12/08 99 151 4/14/09 52 153 RM 36 11/12/08 102 157 4/18/09 55 157 RM 36 11/12/08 108 159 4/21/09 51 160 RM 36 12/10/08 100 150 4/21/09 50 132 RM 36 12/10/08 102 138 3/25/09 36 105 RM 36 12/10/08 109 125 4/20/09 16 131
138 Appendix 20 (cont.): Fork length, location, and date of tagging and recapture at RM 0
FL Tagging Tagging FL (mm) at Recapture Recapture Growth Days of Location Date Tagging FL(mm) Date (mm) Growth RM 36 12/10/08 110 145 4/11/09 35 122 RM 36 12/10/08 110 154 5/7/09 44 148 RM 36 12/10/08 112 154 4/27/09 42 138 RM 36.8 6/18/08 73 128 4/27/09 55 313 RM 36.8 6/18/08 75 138 4/14/09 63 300 RM 36.8 6/25/08 112 144 5/7/09 32 316 RM 36.8 9/3/08 87 120 4/29/09 33 238 RM 36.8 9/3/08 88 123 4/25/09 35 234 RM 36.8 9/9/08 83 111 4/25/09 28 228 RM 36.8 9/9/08 85 125 4/28/09 40 231 RM 36.8 9/9/08 88 119 4/25/09 31 228 RM 36.8 9/9/08 90 126 4/28/09 36 231 RM 36.8 10/1/08 89 129 4/28/09 40 209 RM 36.8 10/1/08 95 151 4/27/09 56 208 RM 36.8 12/10/08 105 126 5/2/09 21 143 RM 36.8 12/10/08 109 129 4/25/09 20 136 Big Springs Creek Outfall 9/8/08 113 164 4/20/09 51 224 Big Springs Creek Outfall 11/13/08 108 140 4/11/09 32 149 Big Springs Creek Outfall 11/13/08 115 135 4/20/09 20 158 Big Springs Creek Outfall 11/13/08 117 148 4/15/09 31 153 Big Springs Creek Outfall 11/13/08 119 150 4/15/09 31 153 Big Springs Creek Outfall 11/13/08 120 149 4/20/09 29 158 Big Springs Creek Outfall 11/13/08 129 151 4/17/09 22 155 Big Springs Creek RM 1.5 12/5/08 108 138 4/21/09 30 137 Big Springs Creek RM 1.5 12/5/08 114 142 4/21/09 28 137 Big Springs Creek RM 1.5 12/5/08 119 138 4/15/09 19 131 Big Springs Creek RM 1.5 12/5/08 126 156 4/21/09 30 137 Kettle Springs Creek Outfall 8/6/08 96 131 4/18/09 35 255 Kettle Springs Creek Outfall 8/26/08 101 167 4/13/09 66 230
139 Appendix 21. List of Julian weeks and calendar equivalents
Julian Week # Inclusive Dates Julian Week # Inclusive Dates
1 1/1 - 1/7 27 7/2 - 7/8
2 1/8 - 1/14 28 7/9 - 7/15
3 1/15 - 1/21 29 7/16 - 7/22
4 1/22 - 1/28 30 7/23 - 7/29
5 1/29 - 2/4 31 7/30 - 8/5
6 2/5 - 2/11 32 8/6 - 8/12
7 2/12 - 2/18 33 8/13 - 8/19
8 2/19 - 2/25 34 8/20 - 8/26
9 2/26 - 3/4* 35 8/27 - 9/2
10 3/5 - 3/11 36 9/3 - 9/9
11 3/12 - 3/18 37 9/10 - 9/16
12 3/19 - 3/25 38 9/17 - 9/23
13 3/26 - 4/1 39 9/24 - 9/30
14 4/2 - 4/8 40 10/1 - 10/7
15 4/9 - 4/15 41 10/8 - 10/14
16 4/16 - 4/22 42 10/15 - 10/21
17 4/23 - 4/29 43 10/22 - 10/28
18 4/30 - 5/6 44 10/29 - 11/4
19 5/7 - 5/13 45 11/5 - 11/11
20 5/14 - 5/20 46 11/12 - 11/18
21 5/21 - 5/27 47 11/19 - 11/25
22 5/28 - 6/3 48 11/26 - 12/02
23 6/4 - 6/10 49 12/03 - 12/09
24 6/11 - 6/17 50 12/10 - 12/16
25 6/18 - 6/24 51 12/17 - 12/23
26 6/25 - 7/1 52 12/24 - 12/31**
140